| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add important info about ANALYZE after create Functional Index |
| Date: | 2020-10-28 19:00:54 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwYGj-P3un2rGbj8Yc8oUohf_kUkDCnO5ap57bO85e56dQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:55 AM Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
wrote:
> I agree the lack of stats may be quite annoying and cause issues, but my
> guess is the chances of backpatching such change are about 0.000001%. We
> have a usable 'workaround' for this - manual analyze.
>
My guess is that it wouldn't be too difficult to write a patch that could
be safely back-patched and it's worth doing so even if ultimately the
decision is not to. But then again the patch writer isn't going to be me.
Given how simple the manual workaround is not having it be manual seems
like it would be safe and straight-forward to implement.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2020-10-28 19:01:21 | Re: [HACKERS] Custom compression methods |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2020-10-28 18:55:38 | Re: Add important info about ANALYZE after create Functional Index |