Neil Conway wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-14-05 at 16:22 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I agree with Tom. I don't think the current behavior is a major issue
> > for users for it to be mentioned more than it already is
> Are you really suggesting that we shouldn't modify config.sgml to note
> that "autovacuum = off" does not actually imply that "the autovacuum
> daemon is disabled"? ISTM that plainly violates the principle of least
> surprise -- it is almost the definition of what an entry in config.sgml
> *should* include.
I agree, the note should be added there (but it should be a short one
and refer the reader someplace else for more complete details).
Was there a doc patch proposed already? I seem to have missed it.
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
In response to
pgsql-docs by date
|Next:||From: Neil Conway||Date: 2007-05-15 15:54:09|
|Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Autovacuum and XID wraparound|
|Previous:||From: Mark Kirkwood||Date: 2007-05-15 03:35:45|
|Subject: Re: [PATCHES] OS/X startup scripts|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Gregory Stark||Date: 2007-05-15 14:07:08|
|Subject: Re: updated SORT/LIMIT patch|
|Previous:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2007-05-15 12:45:03|
|Subject: Re: Automatic adjustment of bgwriter_lru_maxpages|