Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> writes:
> Huh, idiacanthus failed showing vacuum_count 0, in select_parallel.
> So ... the VACUUM command somehow skipped those tables?

No, because the reltuples counts are correct.  I think what we're
looking at there is the stats collector dropping a packet that
told it about vacuum activity.

I'm surprised that we saw such a failure so quickly.  I'd always
figured that the collector mechanism, while it's designed to be
unreliable, is only a little bit unreliable.  Maybe it's more
than a little bit.

                        regards, tom lane


Reply via email to