From: | Ben Chobot <bench(at)silentmedia(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: questions about a table's row estimates |
Date: | 2010-02-11 17:26:17 |
Message-ID: | FB23ED59-D84C-4C0C-8284-3FD9B065324A@silentmedia.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Feb 10, 2010, at 10:28 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> Ben Chobot wrote:
>> I'm looking at pg_stat_user_tables in 8.4.2, and I'm confused about n_live_tup. Shouldn't that be at least fairly close to (n_tup_ins - n_tup-del)? It doesn't seem to be, but I'm unclear why.
>>
> Insert 2000 tuples.
> Delete 1000 tuples.
> vacuum
> Insert 1000 tuples. These go into the free space the deleted tuples used to be in.
> analyze
>
> n_tup_ins=3000
> n_tup_del=1000
> n_live_tup=3000
Say what? It's not documented terrible well (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/monitoring-stats.html is the best I can find) but I thought n_live_tup was basically the number of tuples visible to a new transaction. If my assumption is wrong, that might explain things.
And unfortunately, Tom, we're not resetting stats counters. :(
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2010-02-11 17:28:30 | Re: pg_dump superflous warning message |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2010-02-11 17:24:55 | Re: [HACKERS] Bug on pg_lesslog |