Re: Autovacuum & Table List Ordering

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Usama Dar <munir(dot)usama(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Autovacuum & Table List Ordering
Date: 2008-01-03 14:39:26
Message-ID: 20080103143926.GD10950@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Usama Dar escribió:

> So wouldn't it make sense to pick up the tables in a similar order as well?
> like sorting the list on (deadtuples - calculated threshold) this way we
> will be vacuuming the tables in more need first.

Sure, feel free to propose a specific ordering. I think you would need
to take table size into account too.

Something that's also important to fix while you're doing that is fixing
the "BUG" that is mentioned in the code that Simon griped about not long
ago.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2008-01-03 15:15:59 Re: Slow count(*)
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2008-01-03 14:35:27 Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers