On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Cédric Villemain <[email protected]> wrote: > Le vendredi 5 juillet 2013 15:44:55, Magnus Hagander a écrit : >> On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Cédric Villemain <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Expose the estimation of number of changed tuples since last analyze >> >> >> >> This value, now pg_stat_all_tables.n_mod_since_analyze, was already >> >> tracked and used by autovacuum, but not exposed to the user. >> > >> > I though you agreed on a shorter name ? (n_mod_tuple ?) >> >> No, I suggested a shorter name, but was convinced that this would >> likely be more confusing.. > > I understand (I read the review thread). is it correct to interpret that as > the number of tuples bloating the table ?
No. That would n_dead_tup. It's the number of tuples that changes the distribution of values and would thus require ANALYZE. not VACUUM. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers
