Re: possible vacuum improvement? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: possible vacuum improvement?
Date
Msg-id 17448.1031084696@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: possible vacuum improvement?  ("Mario Weilguni" <mario.weilguni@icomedias.com>)
Responses Re: possible vacuum improvement?  ("Matthew T. OConnor" <matthew@zeut.net>)
Re: possible vacuum improvement?  (Richard Tucker <richt@peerdirect.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Mario Weilguni" <mario.weilguni@icomedias.com> writes:
> That brings me to another point, can't the
> statistics collector used for that?

Hmm, that would be a different way of attacking the problem.  Not sure
offhand which is better, but it'd surely be worth considering both.

Note that collecting of dead-tuple counts requires input from aborted
transactions as well as successful ones.  I don't recall whether the
stats collector currently collects anything from aborted xacts; that
might or might not be a sticky point.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: CREATE CAST requires immutable cast function?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: 7.2.2 bug?