From: Russell Smith <mr-russ@pws.com.au>
To: Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Curious about dead rows.
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 08:46:05 +1100
Message-ID: <473B6C9D.1020804@pws.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <473B2A1F.30804@verizon.net>
References: <4735DBDB.5050208@verizon.net>
<16627.1194714491@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<4735FA9F.1080805@verizon.net>
<b42b73150711131628q1469df3el6f557e10de07a05@mail.gmail.com>
<473A5CC0.3060003@verizon.net>
<b42b73150711131936l65b97b9ya7953383673b2710@mail.gmail.com>
<473AE63D.7090305@verizon.net>
<20071114152249.GA16041@crankycanuck.ca>
<473B2A1F.30804@verizon.net>
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> [snip]
> 2007-11-14 12:00:31 EST DEBUG: analyzing "public.vl_in"
> 2007-11-14 12:00:31 EST DEBUG: "vl_in": scanned 2001 of 2001 pages,
> containing 183983 live rows and 52 dead rows; 3000 rows in sample, 183983
> estimated total rows
> 2007-11-14 12:00:31 EST DEBUG: analyzing "public.vl_cf"
> 2007-11-14 12:00:31 EST DEBUG: "vl_cf": scanned 1064 of 1064 pages,
> containing 134952 live rows and 89 dead rows; 3000 rows in sample, 134952
> estimated total rows
> 2007-11-14 12:00:31 EST DEBUG: analyzing "public.vl_as"
> 2007-11-14 12:00:31 EST DEBUG: "vl_as": scanned 1732 of 1732 pages,
> containing 134952 live rows and 120 dead rows; 3000 rows in sample, 134952
> estimated total rows
> 2007-11-14 12:00:31 EST DEBUG: analyzing "public.vl_ranks"
> 2007-11-14 12:00:31 EST DEBUG: "vl_ranks": scanned 1485 of 1485 pages,
> containing 188415 live rows and 162 dead rows; 3000 rows in sample, 188415
> estimated total rows
> 2007-11-14 12:00:31 EST DEBUG: analyzing "public.vl_mi"
> 2007-11-14 12:00:31 EST DEBUG: "vl_mi": scanned 1325 of 1325 pages,
> containing 134952 live rows and 191 dead rows; 3000 rows in sample, 134952
> estimated total rows
> 2007-11-14 12:00:31 EST DEBUG: analyzing "public.vl_li"
> 2007-11-14 12:00:31 EST DEBUG: "vl_li": scanned 1326 of 1326 pages,
> containing 134952 live rows and 218 dead rows; 3000 rows in sample, 134952
> estimated total rows
>
What does vacuum verbose have to say about this situation?
It is possible that analyze is not getting the number of dead rows right?
Does analyze, followed by vacuum verbose give the same dead row counts?
Sorry for lots of questions, I'm just throwing ideas into the mix.
Russell.
>
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-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: mr-russ@pws.com.au, jeandavid8@verizon.net
Subject: Re: Curious about dead rows.
In-Reply-To: <473B6C9D.1020804@pws.com.au>
* 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