| From: | Joshua Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Peter Schuller" <peter(dot)schuller(at)infidyne(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Implementing cost limit/delays for insert/delete/update/select |
| Date: | 2008-08-25 21:44:47 |
| Message-ID: | 20080825144447.2fbed865@jd-laptop |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:39:54 +0100
Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> But I think we should consider removing the {auto,}vacuum_cost_delay
> parameter or at least hiding and undocumenting it. It's a foot-gun
> and serves no useful purpose that merely lowering the
> {auto,}vacuum_cost_limit can't serve equally well.
I thought we were already considering some kind of IO tweak for Vacuum,
e.g; you may use up to 5Mb/s or something like that?
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Schuller | 2008-08-25 21:59:37 | Re: Implementing cost limit/delays for insert/delete/update/select |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-08-25 21:39:54 | Re: Implementing cost limit/delays for insert/delete/update/select |