Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>              unpatched       HOT     
>> autovacuums  116             43
>> autoanalyzes 139             60
>> HOT greatly reduces the number of vacuums needed. That's good, that's
>> where the gains in throughput in longer I/O bound runs comes from.
> But surely failing to auto-analyze after a HOT update is a bad thing.

Hmm, I suppose. I don't think we've spend any time thinking about how to
factor in HOT updates into the autovacuum and autoanalyze formulas yet.

I'd argue that HOT updates are not as significant as cold ones from
statistics point of view, though, because they don't change indexed
columns. HOT-updated fields are not likely used as primary search quals.

  Heikki Linnakangas

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

Reply via email to