On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 11:47 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > I don't quite get why we don't instead just represent "never vacuumed" > > by storing a more meaningful value in relpages? > > Mostly, not wanting to break clients that look at these fields. > If catalog compatibility weren't a concern, I'd seriously consider > replacing both of them with a float "average tuples per page" ratio.
I think we should do exactly that thing. And I also agree that assuming 10 pages when pg_class says 0 and 1 page when pg_class says 1 is not particularly bright. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
