Re: Add parallel columns for seq scan and index scan on pg_stat_all_tables and _indexes

On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 06:24:54PM +0300, Alena Rybakina wrote:
> yes, I agree with you. Even when I experimented with vacuum settings for
> database and used my vacuum statistics patch [0] for analyzes , I first
> looked at this change in the number of blocks or deleted rows at the
> database level,
> and only then did an analysis of each table and index.
> 
> [0] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/50/5012/

As hinted on other related threads like around [1], I am so-so about
the proposal of these numbers at table and index level now that we
have e7a9496de906 and 5d4298e75f25.

In such cases, I apply the concept that I call the "Mention Bien" (or
when you get a baccalaureat diploma with honors and with a 14~16/20 in
France).  What we have is not perfect, still it's good enough to get
a 14/20 IMO, making hopefully 70~80% of users happy with these new
metrics.  Perhaps I'm wrong, but I'd be curious to know if this
thread's proposal is required at all at the end.

I have not looked at the logging proposal yet.

[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Zywxw7vqPLBfVfXN@paquier.xyz
--
Michael