On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 6:54 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> How about just documenting it in comments, as in the attached patch? I
> tried to address all of the issues with LP_DEAD accounting together.
> Both the issue raised by Masahiko, and one or two others that were
> also discussed recently on
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 1:16 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I'm not sure what to do, though. Both the INDEX_CLEANUP = off case and
> the failsafe case are only intended for emergencies. And it's hard to
> know what to do in a code path that is designed to rarely or never be
> used.
How about just
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 7:11 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> If we create a table with vacuum_index_cleanup = off or execute VACUUM
> with INDEX_CLEANUP = off, vacuum updates pg_stat_all_tables.n_dead_tup
> to the number of HEAPTUPLE_RECENTLY_DEAD tuples. Whereas analyze
> updates it to the sum of
Hi all,
If we create a table with vacuum_index_cleanup = off or execute VACUUM
with INDEX_CLEANUP = off, vacuum updates pg_stat_all_tables.n_dead_tup
to the number of HEAPTUPLE_RECENTLY_DEAD tuples. Whereas analyze
updates it to the sum of the number of HEAPTUPLE_DEAD/RECENTLY_DEAD
tuples and
