On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 11:47 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> > I don't quite get why we don't instead just represent "never vacuumed"
> > by storing a more meaningful value in relpages?
>
> Mostly, not wanting to break clients that look at these fields.
> If catalog compatibility weren't a concern, I'd seriously consider
> replacing both of them with a float "average tuples per page" ratio.
I think we should do exactly that thing.
And I also agree that assuming 10 pages when pg_class says 0 and 1
page when pg_class says 1 is not particularly bright.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
