Hello,
>Does this actually handle multiple indexes? It doesn't appear so, which I'd
>think is a significant problem... :/
Please find v2 attached which does this.
>I'm also not seeing how this will deal with exhausting maintenance_work_mem.
>ISTM that when that happens you'd definitely want a bet
Hello,
>I think it'd be better to combine both numbers into one report:
>It'd also be good to standardize on where the * 100 is happening.
Done
>can be replaced by
>(itemptr->ipblkid != vacrelstats->last_scanned_page)
Get compiler error : invalid operands to binary != (have ‘BlockIdData’ and
‘Bloc
Hello,
>Yes. Any percent completion calculation will have to account for the case of
>needing multiple passes through all the indexes.
>Each dead tuple requires 6 bytes (IIRC) of maintenance work mem. So if you're
>deleting 5M rows with m_w_m=1MB you should be getting many passes through the
>i
Hello,
>logged > 25 times
Sorry, it is much lower at 7 times. Does not change overall point though
regards
Sameer Thakur | Senior Software Specialist | NTTDATA Global Delivery Services
Private Ltd | w. +91.20.6641.7146 | VoIP: 8834.8146 | m. +91 989.016.6656 |
sameer.tha...@nttdata.com | Follow u
Hello,
>I am not really willing to show up as the picky guy here, but could it be
>possible to receive those patches as attached to emails instead of having them
>referenced by URL? I >imagine that you are directly using the nabble interface.
Just configured a new mail client for nabble, did not
