Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I agree that pgstats is not ideal (we've said this from the very > beginning), but I doubt that updating pg_class is the answer; you'd be > generating thousands of dead tuples there. >
But we already do update pg_class after vacuum -- in vac_update_relstats(). Hmm, that performs a heap_inplace_update() ... I assume that this is cheap, but have no idea as if it is suitable for the purpouse. regards, Martin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
