Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum loose ends

On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 10:57:15AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > >>> I think you should at least add an autovacuum specific value for
> > >>> "vacuum_cost_delay" because it turns cost-based vacuum delay on or off.
> >
> > > I am thinking we should move ahead with what we have now, suggest the
> > > work-arounds, and thensee what use-cases we have for it for later
> > > releases.
> >
> > I think it's absolutely unquestionable that there is a use-case for
> > running autovac with different vacuum-delay settings than you would
> > want to apply to manually issued vacuums. We don't need to wait for
> > field experience on that one; we already have it with the contrib
> > version.
>
> So do we need to add new GUC variables?

I was thinking in a GUC var for global setting, and a column in
pg_autovacuum for individual, per table setting. Just one, for the
vacuum_cost_limit parameter; I don't think we really need settable cost
parameters.

A case could be made for setting the vacuum_cost_delay parameter as
well. Thoughts?

--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]alvh.no-ip.org>)
"Es filósofo el que disfruta con los enigmas" (G. Coli)