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 EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
