| From: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jim Nasby <jnasby(at)upgrade(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alena Rybakina <a(dot)rybakina(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Ilia Evdokimov <ilya(dot)evdokimov(at)tantorlabs(dot)com>, Andrei Zubkov <zubkov(at)moonset(dot)ru>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Vacuum statistics |
| Date: | 2025-01-02 22:33:33 |
| Message-ID: | CAA5RZ0vFkGX8Hks3GCg=BPqVEcUHFTXBTmiheKgJ1-0C_14JFg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> While backwards compatibility is important, there’s definitely precedent for changing
> what shows up in the catalog. IMHO it’s better to bite the bullet and move those fields
> instead of having vacuum stats spread across two different views.
Correct, the most recent one that I could think of is pg_stat_checkpointer,
which pulled the checkpoint related columns from pg_stat_bgwriter.
In that case though, these are distinct background processes and
it's a clear distinction.
In this case, I am not so sure about this, particularly because
we will then have the autoanalyze and autovacuum fields in different
views, which could be more confusing to users than saying pg_stat_all_tables
has high level metrics about vacuum and analyze and for more details on
vacuum, refer to pg_stat_vacuum_tables ( or whatever name we settle on ).
Regards,
Sami
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Larry Rosenman | 2025-01-02 22:50:22 | Re: Fwd: Re: A new look at old NFS readdir() problems? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2025-01-02 22:11:32 | Re: magical eref alias names |