"Matthew T. O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So we would have a problem if commands that effect these tables are done > from lots of different databases. In reality, I don't think these > tables change that much (pg_database, pg_shadow, and pg_group), and most > of commands that do effect these tables are usually done from template1.
I agree that there is probably not a large problem here. I just wanted to be sure that pg_autovacuum wouldn't go nuts if we can't fix pgstats for 7.4. > I can hardwire in something to hedge this off like setting the threshold > for shared tables much much lower than normal thresholds. I could also > do something more complicated and try to aggregate all the activity seen > by all the databases and when the sum exceeds the threshold then have > then perform a vacuum from template1 and analyze from all other > databases. That seems like more work than it's worth for a short-term stopgap. If Jan concludes that fixing pgstats is *really* hard and will not happen for awhile, then we could talk about more extensive workarounds in pg_autovacuum, but right now I doubt it's needed. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]