DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=ymail.com;
	h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
	b=C6nJSBbAtOcEM5+yDelHbav0onOCyi19f4tJFsj6UWyfwBKPGavh+ID4oL6BUd5sqSpjhMQ+mzXFgu0tofFZCfgiZwMEKNnbUmofx+B95g/soELFEtaM/2cGvvwvsi4O6qHIDD8rQoyPn/axnW2TYalgWbkzGC/OBACECkIGPLs=;
References: 
 <CAB9893het38CbHoHOt=GZ5tuUnb77EauGidjHsyy7Mqu_4_P9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<28473.1365724754@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Message-ID: <1365731282.15026.YahooMailNeo@web162905.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:48:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>
Reply-To: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] after 9.2.4 patch vacuumdb -avz not analyzing all tables
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Mike Broers <mbroers@gmail.com>
Cc: "pgsql-admin@postgresql.org" <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>,
	"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
	Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <28473.1365724754@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> However I've got to say that both of those side-effects of
> exclusive-lock abandonment seem absolutely brain dead now that I
> see them.=A0 Why would we not bother to tell the stats collector
> what we've done?=A0 Why would we think we should not do ANALYZE
> when we were told to?
>
> Would someone care to step forward and defend this behavior?=20
> Because it's not going to be there very long otherwise.

I'm pretty sure that nobody involved noticed the impact on VACUUM
ANALYZE command; all discussion was around autovacuum impact; and
Jan argued that this was leaving things in a status quo for that,
so I conceded the point and left it for a follow-on patch if
someone felt the behavior needed to change.=A0 Sorry for the miss.

http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/50BB700E.8060404@Yahoo.com

As far as I'm concerned all effects on the explicit command were
unintended and should be reverted.

--
Kevin Grittner
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


--=20
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers