On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:58:10AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think there is a reasonable case for saying that a manual vacuum could
> > hint pgstat to create the entry instead.
> The problem with that is that a simple "VACUUM;" would force pgstat to
> populate its entire hashtable.  Which more or less defeats the idea of
> not wasting table space on inactive tables --- and given the way the
> reporting-file mechanism works, there's definitely an incentive to not
> make the table bigger than it has to be.
> It wouldn't be so bad if pgstat had a mechanism for aging out unused
> table entries ...

Maybe a good compromise would be only populating info for tables that
had dead tuples... that would eliminate any static tables, and most DBAs
should know that those tables are static.
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Reply via email to