On 20.8.24 10:42, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 at 07:52, Michael Harris<har...@gmail.com> wrote:
1. Would such a feature be welcomed? Are there any traps I might not
have thought of?
I think this sounds like a reasonable feature.
2. The existing ANALYZE command has the following structure:
ANALYZE [ ( option [, ...] ) ] [ table_and_columns [, ...] ]
It would be easiest to add ONLY as another option, but that
doesn't look quite
right to me - surely the ONLY should be attached to the table name?
An alternative would be:
ANALYZE [ ( option [, ...] ) ] [ONLY] [ table_and_columns [, ...] ]
Any feedback or advice would be great.
Personally I'd prefer a new option to be added. But I agree ONLY isn't
a good name then. Maybe something like SKIP_PARTITIONS.
Hi everyone,
Your proposal is indeed interesting, but I have a question: can't your
issue be resolved by properly configuring |autovacuum| instead of
developing a new feature for |ANALYZE|?
From my perspective, |ANALYZE| is intended to forcibly gather
statistics from all partitioned tables. If the goal is to ensure that
statistics are updated at the right moment, adjusting the
|autovacuum_analyze_threshold| and |autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor|
parameters might be the solution.
--
Regards,
Ilia Evdokimov,
Tantor Labs LCC.
