Re: patch review, please: Autovacuum/Vacuum times via stats.

On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 05:49:33PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> Back in the discussion of this someone had mentioned capturing all the
> info that you'd get from a vacuum verbose; dead tuples, etc. What do
> people think about that? In particular I think it'd be handy to know how
> many pages vacuum wanted in the FSM vs. how many it got; this would make
> it much easier for people to ensure that the FSM is large enough. Using
> the functions that let you query the FSM won't work because they can't
> tell you if there are pages that should have been in the FSM but didn't
> make it in.

That's a good idea too, but in that case I'd vote for putting it into a
seperate table/view and not with the stats relating to number of seq
scans for example.
--
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.