Re: Why pgAdmin III guru suggests VACUUM in 8.1

From: "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>
To: Andrus <eetasoft(at)online(dot)ee>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why pgAdmin III guru suggests VACUUM in 8.1
Date: 2005-11-22 21:05:47
Message-ID: 4383882B.3040009@zeut.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Andrus wrote:
> Jim,
>
>> Keep in mind that if analyze has never been run on a table the database
>> will assume 1000 rows, which is definately off from 122 rows.
>>
>
> autovacuum processes this tabele regularly.
> I believed that autovacuum can update the row count to be real.

I think this is a poor choice of wording. Autovacuum frequently creates
log entries that read something like:

LOG: autovacuum: processing database "foo"

This implies that autovacuum has done something to that database, which
may or may not be the case. All this message really means is that
autovacuum took at look at this database to see if there was any VACUUM
or ANALYZE operations that should be performed. I think saying
"processing" implies that some action is being taken.

Also this creates a lot of noise in the log files. I think it would be
better to downgrade this message to a NOTICE or even a DEBUG, and
replace it with a LOG level message that states when action has taken
place against the table.

Matt

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas F. O'Connell 2005-11-22 21:47:17 Index Administration: pg_index vs. pg_get_indexdef()
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2005-11-22 20:59:05 Re: Why pgAdmin III guru suggests VACUUM in 8.1