Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYk0A7V-i4Gc9rtyN=n7Sy3rDd=9d5bkBCSDc6abhY1Cw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring  (Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 3:31 AM, Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apparently pg_stat* counts the recently_dead tuple under n_live_tup, else 2
> is a wrong number, where pgstattuple counts recently_dead under
> dead_tuple_count. This could be a source of confusion. If there is any
> serious work considered here, IMHO at least the numbers of the two different
> sources of tuple counters should match in terminology and actual values.

+1.

> Maybe also if pgstattuple were to include the distinction unremovable dead
> tuples vs dead tuples, a log line by vacuum encountering unremovable dead
> tuples could refer to pgstattuple for statistics.

Not sure about the log line, but allowing pgstattuple to distinguish
between recently-dead and quite-thoroughly-dead seems useful.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Core Extensions relocation
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unremovable tuple monitoring