Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1

From: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
Date: 2005-04-29 15:43:37
Message-ID: 20050429124149.W53065@ganymede.hub.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Bruno Wolff III wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 10:09:43 -0400,
>  Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> writes:
>>>> In the last exciting episode, pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us (Bruce Momjian) wrote:
>>>>> o integrated auto-vacuum (Bruce)
>>>
>>>> If this can kick off a vacuum of a Very Large Table at an unfortunate
>>>> time, this can turn out to be a prety painful misfeature.
>>>
>>> [ shrug... ]  You'll always be able to turn it off if you don't want it.
>>> I'm not sure that we'll be ready to turn it on by default even in 8.1.
>>
>> Agreed.  It will just be there to turn on from postgresql.conf if you
>> want it, and we do have TODO information about keeping such an FSM for
>> recently expired pages.
>
> I think if we aren't finding problems in testing that it would be better
> to turn pg_autovacuum on by default. Vacuum is something the burns new
> users and having it one by default is going to cut down on surprises.

Except for the surprise of peridically having the system go unresponsive 
because it hit a large table, and that new user wondering what is wrong 
with postgresql that it just stalls seemingly randomly :(

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-04-29 15:50:54
Subject: Re: pg_restore stuck in a loop?
Previous:From: Matthew T. O'ConnorDate: 2005-04-29 15:40:13
Subject: Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruno Wolff IIIDate: 2005-04-29 15:51:40
Subject: Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
Previous:From: Matthew T. O'ConnorDate: 2005-04-29 15:40:13
Subject: Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group