Re: BUG #17717: Regression in vacuumdb (15 is slower than 10/11 and possible memory issue) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: BUG #17717: Regression in vacuumdb (15 is slower than 10/11 and possible memory issue)
Date
Msg-id 599741.1672345755@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #17717: Regression in vacuumdb (15 is slower than 10/11 and possible memory issue)  (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: BUG #17717: Regression in vacuumdb (15 is slower than 10/11 and possible memory issue)  (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 12:22:58PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> writes:
>>> VACUUM (UPDATE_DATABASE_STATS {yes,no,only})
>>>> VACUUM (DATABASE_STATS {UPDATE,SKIP,ONLY})

> +1 for only introducing one option.  IMHO UPDATE_DATABASE_STATS fits a
> little better since it states the action like most of the other options,
> but I think both choices are sufficiently clear.

I tried to make a patch along these lines, and soon hit a stumbling
block: ONLY is a fully-reserved SQL keyword.  I don't think this
syntax is attractive enough to justify requiring people to
double-quote the option, so we are back to square one.  Anybody
have a different suggestion?

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Avoiding unnecessary clog lookups while freezing
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Avoiding unnecessary clog lookups while freezing