pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: Bossart, Nathan <bossartn@amazon.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: New vacuum option to do only freezing
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 13:46:17 -0400
Message-ID: <15041.1555523177@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD21AoC78PaLBoFK_fgim60-osSuYty-YnM-+ZP-7q_2B9AdMA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <15751.1555256860@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAD21AoCZpFLC-KZywkC-K7OVp0PJKey6znaukTdTv4sEdJWQNQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD21AoAjw_wTZA5vxjBM7BaOTaAHdUdCSui-MtcDwYsY1p25HA@mail.gmail.com>
	<16814.1555348381@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+TgmoYJpnbk3XP2CHkzco95a-0XfpqUeCYm74mUMh2NZX5AxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<23885.1555357618@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+TgmoZu+_-q-GFgs6vwKNj-Rs7YJmPPrX+mx5_Drgvr=QZfMA@mail.gmail.com>
	<28991.1555376836@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+TgmoYVGqmuAQQ-dDK7WswQ5TGee8=A1V9z0oe44UHXm43bYA@mail.gmail.com>
	<30116.1555430496@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<20190416161019.esqg4zj3xm3kjyxy@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<31782.1555433074@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<7519.1555444815@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAD21AoC78PaLBoFK_fgim60-osSuYty-YnM-+ZP-7q_2B9AdMA@mail.gmail.com>

Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 5:00 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> I'm thinking that we really need to upgrade vacuum's reporting totals
>>> so that it accounts in some more-honest way for pre-existing dead
>>> line pointers.  The patch as it stands has made the reporting even more
>>> confusing, rather than less so.

> Or, how about reporting the vacuumed tuples and line pointers we
> separately? It might be too detailed but since with this patch we
> delete either only tuples or only line pointers, it's more accurate.

Yeah, if we wanted to expose these complications more directly, we
could think about adding or changing the main counters.  I was wondering
about whether we should have it report "x bytes and y line pointers
freed", rather than counting tuples per se.

			regards, tom lane





view thread (118+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <15041.1555523177@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../15041.1555523177@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/15041.1555523177@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

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: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, sawada.mshk@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de, robertmhaas@gmail.com, horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp, bossartn@amazon.com, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com
  Subject: Re: New vacuum option to do only freezing
  In-Reply-To: <15041.1555523177@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox