On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 11:33 AM Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 5:57 AM Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I was dismayed to learn that VACUUM VERBOSE on a table no longer tells > > you anything about whether any pages were skipped due to pins. > > VACUUM VERBOSE will show a dedicated line that reports on the number > of pages that we couldn't get a cleanup lock on, if and only if we > couldn't do useful work as a result. In practice this means pages that > had one or more fully DEAD tuples that couldn't be removed due to our > inability to prune. In my view this is strictly better than reporting > on the number of "skipped due to pins" pages.
Ah, I missed that. I think that in the test case I was using, there was a conflicting pin but there were no dead tuples, so that line wasn't present in the output. > In the case of any pages that we couldn't get a cleanup lock on that > didn't have any DEAD tuples (pages that are not reported on at all), > VACUUM hasn't missed any work whatsoever. It even does heap vacuuming, > which doesn't require a cleanup lock in either the first or the second > heap pass. What's the problem with not reporting on that? Maybe nothing. I just thought you'd completely removed all reporting on this, and I'm glad that's not so. Thanks for the quick response. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
