Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm thinking to add "the number of vacuumed tuples" to the message from > > vacuum. The stats collector will subtract the value from n_dead_tuples > > instead of setting it to zero.
> This seems awfully dangerous to me, because then you are operating on > dead reckoning forever Ah, I see. We need 'reset' of statistics sometimes. Now I'll propose to save the n_dead_tuples value at the beginning of vacuum, and send the value with a stat message to subtract. The added number to n_dead_tuples during vacuum will be left. (This is true for now, but will be incorrect after "Recalculating OldestXmin in a long-running vacuum" patch is commited.) I'll send a patch that adds the above to patches. > > This is also needed if we want to make > > some kinds of "partial" vacuum methods. We can adjust the number of vacuumed tuples for patial vacuums that scan a part of heap pages. For example, n_dead_duples_at_start * scanned_pages / rel_pages . We can also use the actually removed tuples in vacuum for adjustments. Regards, --- ITAGAKI Takahiro NTT Open Source Software Center ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match