Re: Request for feature: VACUUM FULL updates pg_stat_all_tables.last_vacuum

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Request for feature: VACUUM FULL updates pg_stat_all_tables.last_vacuum
Date: 2024-05-09 20:11:55
Message-ID: d16beb9b163929894a35f2a9703bc29800b721f5.camel@cybertec.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

On Thu, 2024-05-09 at 09:58 -0400, Ron Johnson wrote:
> Because vacuum is vacuum.

The problem is that the two commands do something different, so it
would be misleading. Renaming VACUUM (FULL) is a good idea in principle,
but I think that is more than 10 years too late. The compatibility
break would be too painful.

Perhaps you could write a patch to add a column "last_rewritten"
to "pg_stat_all_tables"...

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ron Johnson 2024-05-09 20:39:01 Re: Request for feature: VACUUM FULL updates pg_stat_all_tables.last_vacuum
Previous Message Scott Ribe 2024-05-09 15:12:31 Re: Request for feature: VACUUM FULL updates pg_stat_all_tables.last_vacuum