From: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, David Rowley <dgrowley(at)gmail(dot)com>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Trigger more frequent autovacuums of heavy insert tables |
Date: | 2025-02-21 00:35:32 |
Message-ID: | CAAKRu_bUtTR6Vn-3A7gKNTcXAFS2LUt4_hS4AsD_yKsY2=DvpQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 4:59 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 04:36:05PM -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > This makes me think I should also not cap relallfrozen when using it
> > in relation_needs_vacanalyze(). There I cap it to relallvisible and
> > relallvisible is capped to relpages. One of the ideas behind letting
> > people modify these stats in pg_class is that they can change a single
> > field to see what the effect on their system is, right?
>
> Right. Capping these values to reflect reality seems like it could make
> that more difficult.
Attache v7 doesn't cap the result for manual stats updating done with
relation_statistics_update(). I did, however, keep the cap for the
places where vacuum/analyze/create index update the stats. There the
number for relallfrozen is coming directly from visibilitymap_count(),
so it should be correct. I could perhaps add an assert instead, but I
didn't think that really made sense. An assert is meant to help the
developer and what could the developer do about the visibility map
being corrupted.
> >> Should we allow manipulating relallfrozen like we do relallvisible? My
> >> assumption is that would even be required for the ongoing statistics
> >> import/export work.
> >
> > Why would it be required for the statistics import/export work?
>
> It's probably not strictly required, but my naive expectation would be that
> we'd handle relallfrozen just like relallvisible, which appears to be
> dumped in the latest stats import/export patch. Is there any reason we
> shouldn't do the same for relallfrozen?
Nope I don't think so, but I also don't know about how people are
envisioning using a manually updated relallvisible.
- Melanie
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v7-0002-Trigger-more-frequent-autovacuums-with-relallfroz.patch | text/x-patch | 5.2 KB |
v7-0001-Add-relallfrozen-to-pg_class.patch | text/x-patch | 16.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim Jones | 2025-02-21 00:42:24 | Re: [PoC] XMLCast (SQL/XML X025) |
Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2025-02-21 00:32:20 | Re: BitmapHeapScan streaming read user and prelim refactoring |