Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB1ABB5D803 for ; Sun, 29 May 2011 14:19:28 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 42318-02 for ; Sun, 29 May 2011 17:19:21 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com (mail-pz0-f46.google.com [209.85.210.46]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DCA8B5D800 for ; Sun, 29 May 2011 14:19:21 -0300 (ADT) Received: by pzk9 with SMTP id 9so1332683pzk.19 for ; Sun, 29 May 2011 10:19:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=smRcgQ1w+NjLXRYr7uhOSVDaQZv4Rza5ocFesxYzdJI=; b=bQ2a2vi1bqHVhlAWjP8/qaoKv3ot8Xl3QAs5FJWQ1R4n46pHI1aznxlwMg1vO5EHEM /92EiNx3nx33MxRPFdV25iPU2uEmmuAzEaq1dA3ud5j7uFyOAIdymi0BR97j5xI3hjLy gaWWv2/5WFoH5a5OROlpTinumfp4s9V5y/zOU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=SGdzQ62wQhAqIDA3Y9WcR+Y+M3zl5MGa/cuzgJrTpZmowBFw/caYe2qVEWrWV9d/ke HhIbflfAfZeEolPkcuP/eyAlFgwxbyZlHa5PEPF1+UxvPAqWyUI1871tB0nSClVvnXvD YbVElVDWjNDmC7d4jjX3ZQUxVAnNDJc2Qtc34= Received: by 10.68.38.98 with SMTP id f2mr1433654pbk.462.1306689560197; Sun, 29 May 2011 10:19:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.62.169 with HTTP; Sun, 29 May 2011 10:19:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <22525.1306688753@sss.pgh.pa.us> References: <4DD28F73.6010108@25th-floor.com> <25017.1306291669@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4DDCA801.70805@25th-floor.com> <19738.1306338472@sss.pgh.pa.us> <22497.1306341699@sss.pgh.pa.us> <15043.1306423500@sss.pgh.pa.us> <25097.1306426982@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4DDE475B020000250003DD63@gw.wicourts.gov> <4DDE5033020000250003DD71@gw.wicourts.gov> <4DDE7EB8020000250003DDA8@gw.wicourts.gov> <9007.1306446600@sss.pgh.pa.us> <28116.1306609295@sss.pgh.pa.us> <11295.1306645848@sss.pgh.pa.us> <19876.1306680027@sss.pgh.pa.us> <22525.1306688753@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Pavan Deolasee Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 22:49:00 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [ADMIN] pg_class reltuples/relpages not updated by autovacuum/vacuum To: Tom Lane Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?C=E9dric_Villemain?= , Greg Stark , Robert Haas , Kevin Grittner , Florian Helmberger , Alvaro Herrera , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.898 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RFC_ABUSE_POST=0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201105/1502 X-Sequence-Number: 188536 On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Pavan Deolasee writes: >> I am sorry if I sounded terse above. But my gripe is that sometimes we >> are too reluctant to listen to ideas and insist on producing some hard >> numbers first which might take significant efforts. But we are not >> equally strict when such changes are introduced initially. > > The reason for not wanting to change it without some actual evidence > is that there is already evidence: the code has been in the field with > this setting since 8.4, and nobody's vacuum performance has fallen off a > cliff. Well, that's probably because there was definitely much improvement over what existed before. But that does not mean we can't make it better. IOW there are no complaints because there is no regression. > So while I'd agree that there was little testing done before the > code went in, there is more than zero reason to leave it where it is. > Without some positive evidence showing that another value is better, > I'm disinclined to change it. =A0I also think that you're not helping > by complaining about the code without being willing to do some work > to try to collect such evidence. > I am not complaining about the code. I am suggesting we can be more receptive to ideas, especially when we know what we have today was not backed by any evidence either. I will anyways do some tests and post numbers when I work on single-pass vacuum patch. I'll try to experiment with this stuff at that time. Thanks, Pavan --=20 Pavan Deolasee EnterpriseDB=A0 =A0=A0 http://www.enterprisedb.com