Re: How reliable are the stats collector stats?

From: Eric B(dot)Ridge <ebr(at)tcdi(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Pgsql-General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: How reliable are the stats collector stats?
Date: 2004-03-13 06:27:38
Message-ID: 85F782F8-74B7-11D8-8DB5-000A95D98B3E@tcdi.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mar 13, 2004, at 12:51 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

> Eric Ridge <ebr(at)tcdi(dot)com> writes:
>> Could pg_stats_user_indexes be lying?
>
> Jan probably knows this stuff better than I, but my guess is that if
> the
> counter type you are looking at is incrementing at all, then it's not
> too far off.

Many of the indexes that report zero usage I agree with. Only a few
seem questionable. Double-checking the queries (and their plans) will
provide the only true answer.

> I certainly can't think of a failure mechanism that would
> cause some indexes to be shown with zero hits when other indexes do
> get hits.

This is good to know. I don't have specifics handy, but I've seen a
few columns from the pg_statio_user_tables view come back w/ null
values. Oh yeah, this is against v7.3.4.

>> I realize the real question is "why aren't these indexes being used",
>
> Up to a point. If it's a unique index then you may want the
> uniqueness-check functionality even if the index is never used for
> searches.

Very good point. Fortunately the indexes in question are not unique
indexes.

thanks!

eric

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Edwin Pauli 2004-03-14 00:34:53 PostgeSQL problem (server crashed?)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-03-13 05:51:03 Re: How reliable are the stats collector stats?