| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
| Cc: | uwcssa <uwcssa(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: un-vacuum? |
| Date: | 2006-01-19 22:11:56 |
| Message-ID: | 9793.1137708716@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 03:54:33PM -0500, uwcssa wrote:
>> I want to do this for repeating some experiment results, not for
>> tuning the db (pretty much like using an old machine to find
>> performance difference for an algorithm). so if i have a way
>> of knowing which tables are storing the statistics, i guess i can
>> delete all from that table to archieve this.
> pg_statistic stores statistics. I think it's safe to delete rows,
"DELETE FROM pg_statistic" is safe enough, but it's more of an
"un-analyze" than an "un-vacuum". There is no "un-vacuum".
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew - Supernews | 2006-01-19 22:40:41 | Bug: random() can return 1.0 |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-01-19 22:11:26 | Re: Cache-flush stress testing |