public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Laurenz Albe <[email protected]>
To: Fujii Masao <[email protected]>
Cc: Mircea Cadariu <[email protected]>
Cc: Zechman, Derek S <[email protected]>
Cc: Adrian Klaver <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: analyze-in-stages post upgrade questions
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 17:16:12 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHGQGwHpA8nJfnX1Tk8CiVRUuZofACUFRHwk-8i=9yHYtmqiTw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CO1PR04MB8281387B9AD9DE30976966BBC045A@CO1PR04MB8281.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<PH0PR04MB82943D67CD179002714AA503C044A@PH0PR04MB8294.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
<[email protected]>
<PH0PR04MB8294E796D6297D4E3BE4EFB6C049A@PH0PR04MB8294.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAHGQGwEvwpydO7hjnB51Q2zgS0ydv31X4HCFLNzMeqLr=poS8w@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAHGQGwEj8PCk1OVveJ_F1sj_COrV95N-mfu_tLUn4gdcAM24kA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAHGQGwGje3mv5sOmyCJ0NroNPF8938OYCOHMJZbegTekccZZ=g@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAHGQGwHpA8nJfnX1Tk8CiVRUuZofACUFRHwk-8i=9yHYtmqiTw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 2025-08-19 at 23:40 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > > --- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/vacuumdb.sgml
> > > +++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/vacuumdb.sgml
> > > @@ -397,6 +397,15 @@ PostgreSQL documentation
> > > Multiple tables can be vacuumed by writing multiple
> > > <option>-t</option> switches.
> > > </para>
> > > + <para>
> > > + If no tables are specified with the <option>--table</option> option,
> > > + <application>vacuumdb</application> will clean all regular tables
> > > + and materialized views in the connected database.
> > > + If <option>--analyze-only</option> or
> > > + <option>--analyze-in-stages</option> is also specified,
> > > + it will analyze all regular tables, partitioned tables,
> > > + and materialized views (but not foreign tables).
> > > + </para>
> >
> > I suggest replacing "clean" with "process", since VACUUM does so much more than
> > clean up dead tuples.
>
> I see your point. However, since the vacuumdb docs already use "clean"
> in several places, I think it's better to keep using "clean" here
> for consistency. Thought?
Works for me; I didn't consider that.
> > Concerning backpatching, I voted against, but I suggest that this be backpatched
> > to v18. I don't feel very strongly about it though.
>
> As for back-patching, I failed to find a strong reason to apply this change
> to v18 over the many other patches that could not be committed before
> the feature freeze... Of course if there's broad support for back-patching,
> we can certainly revisit it. But for now I'm thinking to commit the patch
> to master.
I don't have a strong reason either - my reasoning was that the change is small
and unlikely to introduce a bug, and that it would be nice to get more accurate
statistics on partitioned tables after "pg_upgrade" a year earlier.
But I won't object if the patch is only in v19.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
view thread (19+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: analyze-in-stages post upgrade questions
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox