Re: [Proposal] More Vacuum Statistics

On 2015-05-29 21:30:57 -0500, Jim Nasby wrote:
> It occurs to me that there's no good reason for vacuum-derived stats to be
> in the stats file; it's not like users run vacuum anywhere near as often as
> other commands. It's stats could be kept in pg_class; we're already keeping
> things like relallvisible there.

While it might be viable to store them somewhere but the stat files, I
don't think pg_class is a good place. Its size is not any less critical
than the stats files. I.e. reading it sits in several rather hot paths,
and we keep tuples from it in memory in a lot of places.

Greetings,

Andres