| From: | Ildus Kurbangaliev <i(dot)kurbangaliev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Grigory Smolkin <g(dot)smolkin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: autovacuum: change priority of the vacuumed tables |
| Date: | 2018-03-02 09:07:51 |
| Message-ID: | 20180302120751.5b406f26@wp.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 23:39:34 -0800
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2018-02-19 17:00:34 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > I have a hard time understanding how adding yet another autovacuum
> > table-level knob makes the DBA's life any easier. Especially when
> > the behavior is so unreliable and does not really guarantee when the
> > high-priority table will be cleaned up ...
>
> Based on the criticism voiced and a quick skim of the proposal, this
> CF entry appears to still be in its design phase. In my opinion this
> thus isn't v11 material, and should be marked as 'returned with
> feedback'?
Hi, I agree, this patch definitely needs more thinking.
--
---
Ildus Kurbangaliev
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
Russian Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ildus Kurbangaliev | 2018-03-02 09:22:15 | Re: 2018-03 Commitfest Summary (Andres #3) |
| Previous Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2018-03-02 09:03:16 | Re: 2018-03 CFM |