Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> o Error correction for n_dead_tuples
> Also, I'm still quite unhappy that the patch converts the tracking of > n_dead_tuples into a dead-reckoning system in which incremental changes > are continually applied without any feedback that'd prevent the value > from diverging arbitrarily far from reality. Murphy's law says that > the value *will* diverge, if you don't have any negative feedback > in the loop to force it to track reality. There is *no feedback loop* in the patch. It will clear the stats at the beginning of vacuum, and leave n_dead_tuples collected during the vacuum. Even if some errors are left after the vacuum, they will be cleared at the next vacuum. Errors should not be accumulated through repeated vacuums. > There may be something to be done here, but there's not any evidence > at hand that CVS HEAD actually suffers from a problem in tracking > n_dead_tuples, and even if it does I do not think that this particular > patch is a good fix. The problem is in the cost-based delayed vacuum. We turned cost-delay on as default and will encourage to use autovacuum at 8.3. Dead tuple ratio is not predictable from autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor in the current behavior; It might make DBA feel unhappy. Regards, --- ITAGAKI Takahiro NTT Open Source Software Center ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org