Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> That's fair. Anyone who is running into the sort of autovacuum issues
> prompting this discussion would happily pay the overhead to get better
> management of that; it's one of the easiest things to justify more
> per-table stats on IMHO. Surely the per-tuple counters are vastly more
> of a problem than these messages could ever be.
No, it's the total number of counters that I'm concerned about, not
so much when they get updated.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
