Monday, October 25, 2010, 4:12:39 PM you wrote: > "Jochen Erwied" <joc...@pgsql.erwied.eu> writes: >> VACUUM FULL does not update statistics so display of pg_stat_user_tables is >> wrong. A normal VACUUM updates the relevant information.
> Hmm. This is a definitional issue: what do we really mean by last_vacuum? > I'm inclined to think that the current behavior is reasonable. VACUUM > FULL is (still) not intended as a routine maintenance operation, and > the point of that column is to track routine maintenance operations. Well, when reading http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/monitoring-stats.html then last_vacuum contains the last time of a user-initiated vacuum. There's no distinction made what kind of vacuum was made. And IMHO even if VACUUM FULL isn't meant for routine vacuuming, the state should be changed. Of course the easiest way to fix this bug (or better flaw) is to change the documentation :-) -- Jochen Erwied | home: joc...@erwied.eu +49-208-38800-18, FAX: -19 Sauerbruchstr. 17 | work: j...@mbs-software.de +49-2151-7294-24, FAX: -50 D-45470 Muelheim | mobile: jochen.erw...@vodafone.de +49-173-5404164 -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
