| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout |
| Date: | 2007-04-18 15:40:52 |
| Message-ID: | 20070418154052.GB19598@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > I seem to remember that we'd agreed that autovacuum should ignore any
> > > globally set statement_timeout, on the grounds that a poorly chosen
> > > setting could indefinitely prevent large tables from being vacuumed.
FWIW in testing, I just noticed that autovacuum does not pay attention
to statement_timeout anyway, because it is only set in
start_xact_command, which is used for interactive commands only, not in
autovacuum. So there's no need to patch anything.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-04-18 16:37:04 | Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-04-18 15:30:04 | Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout |