Re: Partitioning versus autovacuum
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Partitioning versus autovacuum |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM-w4HPpUbgcQ1220_Chs_2nGh5Dw1gBiegem7MAHfPHCg+Oyw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Partitioning versus autovacuum (Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>) |
Ответы |
Re: Partitioning versus autovacuum
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Actually I did just find it in the To-do wiki:
Have autoanalyze of parent tables occur when child tables are modified
On Mon., Sep. 30, 2019, 1:48 p.m. Greg Stark, <stark@mit.edu> wrote:
So we now support `ANALYZE partitioned_table` which will gather statistics for the main table by gathering stats from all the partitions.However as far as I can tell autovacuum will never actually trigger this analyze. Because we never generate any update records for the parent table in the statistics. Have I missed something?I didn't find any discussion of this in the threads from when partitioning was committed but there were a lot of discussions and I could easily have missed it.Is there a story for this? Some way to configure things so that autovacuum will analyze partitioned tables?Or should we look at doing something? Maybe whether we analyze a child we should also update the parent -- and if there's no stats yet run analyze on it?This may be a serious enough problem for users that it may warrant backpatching. Not having any stats is resulting in some pretty weird plans for us.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: