On 8/7/2004 12:47 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> wieck(at)svr1(dot)postgresql(dot)org (Jan Wieck) writes:
>> Vacuum delay activated by default.
> What? If there was consensus to do this, I missed it. If there was
> even any *discussion* of doing this, I missed it.
> regards, tom lane
How many questions about vacuum still grabbing all available bandwidth,
vacuum slowing down the whole system, vacuum being all evil do you want
to answer for 8.0? Over and over again we are defending reasonable
default configuration values against gazillions of little switches, and
this is a reasonable default that will be a relief for large databases
and makes more or less no difference for small ones.
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #
In response to
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-08-07 16:45:58|
|Subject: Re: pgsql-server: Vacuum delay activated by default. |
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-08-07 12:21:27|
|Subject: pgsql-server: Fix markup.|