Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------KaROnRDrW2d0kTtZUDxWiEQF"
Message-ID: <bc1eb1bb-7ac1-4b0c-81a7-a16a18dfcb05@tantorlabs.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2024 14:25:32 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: ANALYZE ONLY
To: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres@jeltef.nl>, Michael Harris <harmic@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
References: <CADofcAWATx_haD=QkSxHbnTsAe6+e0Aw8Eh4H8cXyogGvn_kOg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGECzQTq_OPhXvA+VK3zzQ-ZYa97Bg8D+JomjXTuiTs9P6Q4Tw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Ilia Evdokimov <ilya.evdokimov@tantorlabs.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGECzQTq_OPhXvA+VK3zzQ-ZYa97Bg8D+JomjXTuiTs9P6Q4Tw@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/bc1eb1bb-7ac1-4b0c-81a7-a16a18dfcb05%40tantorlabs.com>
Precedence: bulk

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------KaROnRDrW2d0kTtZUDxWiEQF
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 20.8.24 10:42, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 at 07:52, Michael Harris<harmic@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>    1. Would such a feature be welcomed? Are there any traps I might not
>> have thought of?
> I think this sounds like a reasonable feature.
>
>
>>    2. The existing ANALYZE command has the following structure:
>>
>>       ANALYZE [ ( option [, ...] ) ] [ table_and_columns [, ...] ]
>>
>>       It would be easiest to add ONLY as another option, but that
>> doesn't look quite
>>       right to me - surely the ONLY should be attached to the table name?
>>       An alternative would be:
>>
>>       ANALYZE [ ( option [, ...] ) ] [ONLY] [ table_and_columns [, ...] ]
>>
>> Any feedback or advice would be great.
> Personally I'd prefer a new option to be added. But I agree ONLY isn't
> a good name then. Maybe something like SKIP_PARTITIONS.
>

Hi everyone,

Your proposal is indeed interesting, but I have a question: can't your 
issue be resolved by properly configuring |autovacuum| instead of 
developing a new feature for |ANALYZE|?

 From my perspective, |ANALYZE| is intended to forcibly gather 
statistics from all partitioned tables. If the goal is to ensure that 
statistics are updated at the right moment, adjusting the 
|autovacuum_analyze_threshold| and |autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor| 
parameters might be the solution.

-- 
Regards,
Ilia Evdokimov,
Tantor Labs LCC.

--------------KaROnRDrW2d0kTtZUDxWiEQF
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>On 20.8.24 10:42, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:</p>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAGECzQTq_OPhXvA+VK3zzQ-ZYa97Bg8D+JomjXTuiTs9P6Q4Tw@mail.gmail.com">
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 at 07:52, Michael Harris <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:harmic@gmail.com">&lt;harmic@gmail.com&gt;</a> wrote:
</pre>
      <blockquote type="cite">
        <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">  1. Would such a feature be welcomed? Are there any traps I might not
have thought of?
</pre>
      </blockquote>
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
I think this sounds like a reasonable feature.


</pre>
      <blockquote type="cite">
        <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">  2. The existing ANALYZE command has the following structure:

     ANALYZE [ ( option [, ...] ) ] [ table_and_columns [, ...] ]

     It would be easiest to add ONLY as another option, but that
doesn't look quite
     right to me - surely the ONLY should be attached to the table name?
     An alternative would be:

     ANALYZE [ ( option [, ...] ) ] [ONLY] [ table_and_columns [, ...] ]

Any feedback or advice would be great.
</pre>
      </blockquote>
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Personally I'd prefer a new option to be added. But I agree ONLY isn't
a good name then. Maybe something like SKIP_PARTITIONS.

</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <p>Hi everyone,</p>
    <p>Your proposal is indeed interesting, but I have a question: can't
      your issue be resolved by properly configuring <code>autovacuum</code>
      instead of developing a new feature for <code>ANALYZE</code>?</p>
    <p>From my perspective, <code>ANALYZE</code> is intended to
      forcibly gather statistics from all partitioned tables. If the
      goal is to ensure that statistics are updated at the right moment,
      adjusting the <code>autovacuum_analyze_threshold</code> and <code>autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor</code>
      parameters might be the solution.</p>
    <p></p>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
Regards,
Ilia Evdokimov,
Tantor Labs LCC.</pre>
  </body>
</html>

--------------KaROnRDrW2d0kTtZUDxWiEQF--