Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
>On Thursday 20 November 2003 20:00, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
>
>
>>Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I am still wary of inverting vacuum analyze frequency. You think it is
>>>better to set inverted default rather than documenting it?
>>>
>>>
>>I think inverting the vacuum and analyze frequency is wrong.
>>
>>
>Me. Too. ATM all I can think of this patch attached. Josh, is it sufficient
>for you?..:-)
>
>
The patch just adds an example to the README, this looks ok to me.
>Matthew, I am confyused about one thing. Why would autovacuum count updates
>while checking for analyze threshold? Analyze does not change statistics
>right? ( w.r.t line 1072, pg_autovacuum.c). For updating statistics, only
>inserts+deletes should suffice, isn't it?
>
>
An update is the equivelant of an insert and a delete, so it counts
towards the analyze count as much as an insert.
>Other than that, I think autovacuum does everything it can.
>
>
It could be more customizable.
