"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> Just curious, but isn't this one of the key points about pg_autovacuum in
> the first place? So that you vacuum what needs to be vacuum'd, and not
> *everything* ... ? Shouldn't the answer to the 'bandwidth issue' change
> to 'you should install/use pg_autovacuum'?
No, not really, but I think it's much more likely that you'd want to
enable vacuum delay for autovacuum-commanded vacuums than vacuums
commanded interactively. Or, if you still prefer the old-tech way of
performing routine vacuums from a cron script, you'd probably turn on
vacuum delay in that cron script.
I think we *should* add to autovacuum a parameter to let it set
vacuum_delay for its vacuums, and maybe even default to having it on.
But I'm unconvinced we want any delay as the global default.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-08-07 18:07:48|
|Subject: pgsql-server: Update pitr docs to mention inclusive/exclusive xid |
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-08-07 17:55:59|
|Subject: pgsql-server: Remove bogus trailing dot from eventlog output, per |