| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuro Yamada <tatsuro(dot)yamada(dot)tf(at)nttcom(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: progress report for ANALYZE |
| Date: | 2019-07-08 18:10:50 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYFxXTaQErccaV+z6+kuNDFY64H+eDRPXkyh_JG=uZArQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 5:29 AM Tatsuro Yamada
<tatsuro(dot)yamada(dot)tf(at)nttcom(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> 17520|13599|postgres|16387|f|16387|scanning table|4425|4425
> 17520|13599|postgres|16387|f|16387|analyzing sample|0|0
> 17520|13599|postgres|16387|f|16387||0|0 <-- Is it Okay??
Why do we zero out the block numbers when we switch phases? The
CREATE INDEX progress reporting patch does that kind of thing too, and
it seems like poor behavior to me.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-07-08 18:18:14 | Re: Multivariate MCV list vs. statistics target |
| Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2019-07-08 18:09:22 | Re: [PATCH] kNN for btree |