On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 15:40 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> 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.

I agree with that thought, but the changes to unindexed fields are just
as important for selectivity calculations so we should ANALYZE just as
frequently. ANALYZE is cheap, so we aren't saving anything by avoiding

  Simon Riggs
  EnterpriseDB  http://www.enterprisedb.com

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

Reply via email to