Re: Return of the Solaris vacuum polling problem -- anyone remember this?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Return of the Solaris vacuum polling problem -- anyone remember this?
Date: 2010-08-23 19:15:34
Message-ID: 10189.1282590934@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> OK, I have attached a proposed patch to improve this. I moved the
> pg_clog mention to a new paragraph and linked it to the reason the
> default is relatively low.

The references to "vacuum freeze" are incorrect; autovacuum does NOT
do the equivalent of VACUUM FREEZE. Please stop playing around with
the perfectly good existing wording.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2010-08-23 19:16:42 Re: [9.1] pg_stat_get_backend_server_addr
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2010-08-23 19:08:58 Re: WIP: extensible enums