Re: [HACKERS] Queuing all tables for analyze after recovery

On 10/19/2017 10:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Uh ... recommended by whom?  pg_statistic has exactly the same reliability
> guarantees as the rest of the system catalogs.

Actually I'm not exactly sure what is lost and what is preserved. I'm 
pretty sure that pg_stat_all_tables and similar views turn out with no 
data after a failover.

Also I have some experience with badly performing databases after a 
failover, which went back to normal performance after whole cluster 
analyze. This email from AWS suggests that it's not only me.

> I don't deny that there might be cases where this is worth doing, but
> it does not seem so likely that it should be part of one's standard
> checklist.  Much less something that we should expend a great deal
> of effort to automate.

I assumed that the effort here shouldn't be that large. I imagined a 
simple check if the statistics are missing when considering tables for 
analyze by autovacuum. But I'm not a programmer, so I might misestimate 
this effort badly.

-- 
Regards,
Tomasz "Tometzky" Ostrowski


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers