From: | Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: ANALYZE after restore |
Date: | 2002-04-03 17:06:02 |
Message-ID: | 3CAB367A.4E1DD48D@postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Jan,
Jan Wieck wrote:
>
<snip>
> The defaults after a restore should result in index scans
> most of the time, resulting in some medium decent
> performance. And PostgreSQL needs some frequent VACUUM
> anyway, so after a while this problem solves itself for the
> average user.
>
> A database wide forced VACUUM on the other hand can make
> things worse. I have seen scenarios, where you have to
> explicitly leave out ANALYZE for specific tables in order to
> keep them index-scanned. So what you're proposing is to force
> professional PostgreSQL users to wait after restore for a
> useless ANALYZE to complete, before they can reset things
> with a normal VACUUM to get their required performance back?
> And all that just to make dummies happier?
>
> Jan
Nope, I'm figuring that if it's an option, and the option is on by
default, then for the majority of people that will be a good thing.
Anyone that's a professional PostgreSQL user will know about to turn the
option off i.e. pg_dump --something (etc). Sure, we all make mistakes
and will forget now and again, but I don't think that should stop us
from taking into account that the majority of users out there are fairly
PostgreSQL clue-less.
If we can make it easy without much inconvenience and without
sacrificing the power of the database, we should.
:-)
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
<snip>
--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | mlw | 2002-04-03 17:06:31 | Re: Question: update and transaction isolation |
Previous Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2002-04-03 17:00:35 | Re: [HACKERS] Suggestions please: names for function cachability |