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

Re: [PATCHES] A way to let Vacuum warn if FSM settings are low.

From: Ron Mayer <ron(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
To: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org,pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] A way to let Vacuum warn if FSM settings are low.
Date: 2005-02-24 22:43:45
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.58.0502241441230.13185@greenie.cheapcomplexdevices.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-patches
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005, Ron Mayer wrote:
> Should the relation overflow be a WARNING or a LOG?  It sounds like
> if you have that problem it's almost certainly a problem, right?

And while I'm at it... what's the convention for INFOs vs LOGs?
The "checkpoint...too frequent" seemed similar, and is a LOG.

And do people think the HINT's I added add value or just noise?

In response to

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Eric CramptonDate: 2005-02-24 22:49:00
Subject: Patch for Postmaster Uptime (from the TODO)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-02-24 22:42:13
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] A way to let Vacuum warn if FSM settings are low.

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Rick CaseyDate: 2005-02-24 22:50:47
Subject: Re: basic trigger using OLD not working?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-02-24 22:42:13
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] A way to let Vacuum warn if FSM settings are low.

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