On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:58:10AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I think there is a reasonable case for saying that a manual vacuum could > > hint pgstat to create the entry instead. > > The problem with that is that a simple "VACUUM;" would force pgstat to > populate its entire hashtable. Which more or less defeats the idea of > not wasting table space on inactive tables --- and given the way the > reporting-file mechanism works, there's definitely an incentive to not > make the table bigger than it has to be. > > It wouldn't be so bad if pgstat had a mechanism for aging out unused > table entries ...
Maybe a good compromise would be only populating info for tables that had dead tuples... that would eliminate any static tables, and most DBAs should know that those tables are static. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
