| From: | Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Statistics Import and Export |
| Date: | 2025-02-24 21:01:09 |
| Message-ID: | CADkLM=e6NTjWzoqoUkeEpt9qRqwNE9zkmMN010VKKjoGxbMCVw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> I don't think that's necessarily true, hot pruning might help some, as
> afaict
> the restore happens in multiple transactions.
>
If we're willing to take the potential bloat to avoid a nasty complexity,
then I'm all for discarding it. Jeff just indicated off-list that he isn't
seeing noticeable difference in table size, maybe we're safe with how we
use the function now.
>
> But even if that's the case, I don't think it's worth using in place
> updates
> to avoid it. We should work to get rid of them, not introduce them in more
> places.
>
As the number of statlike columns in pg_class grows, might it make sense to
break them off into their own relation, leaving pg_class to be far more
stable?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-02-24 21:02:55 | Re: MAX_BACKENDS size (comment accuracy) |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2025-02-24 21:01:00 | Re: Statistics Import and Export |