On 2019-Mar-27, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 2019-03-26 16:28, Euler Taveira wrote: > > I don't remember why we didn't consider table without stats to be > > ANALYZEd. Isn't it the case to fix autovacuum? Analyze > > autovacuum_count + vacuum_count = 0? > > When the autovacuum system was introduced, we didn't have those columns. > But now it seems to make sense that a table with autoanalyze_count + > analyze_count = 0 should be a candidate for autovacuum even if the write > statistics are zero. Obviously, this would have the effect that a > pg_stat_reset() causes an immediate autovacuum for all tables, so maybe > it's not quite that simple.
I'd say it would make them a candidate for auto-analyze; upon completion of that, there's sufficient data to determine whether auto-vacuum is needed or not. This sounds like a sensible idea to me. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
