Robin Iddon <robin@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > The tuples and thresholds for the pg_statistic table look like they > might be the reason it doesn't get vacuumed. The question is, why does > the reltuples on the stats table keep climbing until you do a vacuum > full, at which point they return to (near) zero? No matter what > threshold and scale I set, I am not going to get that table vacuumed > because it's delete/update rate are 0 (it's always inserted to I believe). Quite incorrect --- if that were so, there would be no dead tuples for vacuum to remove, hm? Actually ANALYZE does an update-or-insert-if-not-present fandango. I'm sort of mystified by your report. I can think of several ways that the system might fail to notice that pg_statistic needs vacuuming, but none of them seem to actually occur in the current code, and I don't see any relevant difference in the CVS logs (I admit to being too lazy to build an exact 8.0.3 version to test --- but 8.0.7 seems fine). Can you keep an eye on pg_statistic's entry in the pg_stat_all_tables view for each affected database, and confirm whether the n_tup_upd/ n_tup_del counts are rising over time or not? That would at least narrow down the problem a bit. regards, tom lane
