On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 12:19 PM Melanie Plageman <melanieplage...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 2:16 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 2:01 PM Alena Rybakina <a.rybak...@postgrespro.ru> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi! Thank you for your review! > > > > > > On 05.09.2024 15:47, jian he wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 1:23 AM Alena Rybakina <a.rybak...@postgrespro.ru> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, all! > > > > > > I have attached the new version of the code and the diff files > > > (minor-vacuum.no-cbot). > > > > Thank you for updating the patches. I've reviewed the 0001 patch and > > have two comments. > > I took a very brief look at this and was wondering if it was worth > having a way to make the per-table vacuum statistics opt-in (like a > table storage parameter) in order to decrease the shared memory > footprint of storing the stats.
I'm not sure how users can select tables that enable vacuum statistics as I think they basically want to have statistics for all tables, but I see your point. Since the size of PgStat_TableCounts approximately tripled by this patch (112 bytes to 320 bytes), it might be worth considering ways to reduce the number of entries or reducing the size of vacuum statistics. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
