On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 12:12:27AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes:
> > Copying the statistics from the old server is on the pg_upgrade TODO
> > list. I have avoided it because it will add an additional requirement
> > that will make pg_upgrade more fragile in case of major version changes.
>
> > Does anyone have a sense of how often we change the statistics data
> > between major versions?
>
> I don't think pg_statistic is inherently any more stable than any other
> system catalog. We've whacked it around significantly just last week,
> which might color my perception a bit, but there are other changes on
> the to-do list. (For one example, see nearby complaints about
> estimating TOAST-related costs, which we could not fix without adding
> more stats data.)
Yes, that was my reaction too. pg_upgrade has worked hard to avoid
copying any system tables, relying on pg_dump to handle that.
I just received a sobering blog comment stating that pg_upgrade took 5
minutes on a 0.5TB database, but analyze took over an hour:
http://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2012.html#March_12_2012
Is there some type of intermediate format we could use to dump/restore
the statistics? Is there an analyze "light" mode we could support that
would run faster?
--
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
