| From: | Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: new GUC var: autovacuum_process_all_tables |
| Date: | 2009-02-06 17:40:50 |
| Message-ID: | 498C7622.4050504@cheapcomplexdevices.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 17:08 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> My feeling is that we should be trying to eliminate use-cases for
>> cron-driven vacuuming, not trying to make sure that cron-driven
>> scripts can do anything autovacuum can.
> Agreed. IMO, the user should only have to think about "vacuum" in an
> abstract sense.
+1
>> The main remaining use-case seems to me to make vacuuming work adhere
>> to some business-determined schedule, hence maintenance windows seem
>> like the next thing to do.
> Also agreed.
Somewhat agreed - since in many cases the business-determined schedule
is just a rough estimate of measurable attributes of the machine. When
we say "vacuum between midnight and 5am" we often actually mean "vacuum
when the I/O subsystem has bandwidth to spare and the machine's otherwise
lightly loaded, and we guess that means late at night".
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-02-06 17:43:42 | Re: Mention CITEXT in the FAQ |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-02-06 17:37:45 | KOI8-U support (was Re: [BUGS] create database warning) |