Tom Lane wrote: > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:58:10AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> I think there is a reasonable case for saying that a manual vacuum could > >>> hint pgstat to create the entry instead. > >> > >> The problem with that is that a simple "VACUUM;" would force pgstat to > >> populate its entire hashtable. > > > Maybe a good compromise would be only populating info for tables that > > had dead tuples... that would eliminate any static tables, and most DBAs > > should know that those tables are static. > > Hm, that definitely seems like an idea. Does the current pgstat message > from vacuum tell how many rows it deleted?
Hum, no. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
