=?ISO-8859-1?Q?C=E9dric_Villemain?= <cedric.villemain.deb...@gmail.com> writes:
> 2011/10/8 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
>> The diff indicates that the idx_scan count advanced but idx_tup_fetch
>> did not, which is not so surprising here because tenk2 hasn't been
>> modified in some time. If the autovacuum daemon managed to mark it
>> all-visible before the stats test runs, then an index-only scan will
>> happen, and bingo, no idx_tup_fetch increment (because indeed no heap
>> tuple was fetched).
>>
>> I'm inclined to fix this by changing the test to examine idx_tup_read
>> not idx_tup_fetch. Alternatively, we could have the test force
>> enable_indexonlyscan off. Thoughts?
> No preferences, but is it interesting to add a "vacuum freeze"
> somewhere and check expected result after index-only scan ? (for both
> idx_tup_read and idx_tup_fetch)
This test is only trying to make sure that the stats collection
machinery is working. I don't think that we should try to coerce things
so that it can check something as context-sensitive as whether an
index-only scan happened. It's too fragile already --- we've seen
non-reproducible failures here many times before.
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
