Re: [PATCHES] Autovacuum and XID wraparound

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Autovacuum and XID wraparound
Date: 2007-05-15 02:49:03
Message-ID: 1179197343.6047.47.camel@goldbach
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs pgsql-patches

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.

> though if you want to move one of those, we can do that.

So the change would be okay if we also removed one of the other mentions
in an unrelated section of the manual? I don't see the logic.

-Neil

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Kirkwood 2007-05-15 03:35:45 Re: [PATCHES] OS/X startup scripts
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-05-15 02:44:51 Re: [PATCHES] OS/X startup scripts

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2007-05-15 02:58:35 Re: CREATE TABLE LIKE INCLUDING INDEXES support
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-05-15 02:44:51 Re: [PATCHES] OS/X startup scripts