Re: Berserk Autovacuum (let's save next Mandrill)

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski <me(at)komzpa(dot)net>
Cc: Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Berserk Autovacuum (let's save next Mandrill)
Date: 2019-04-10 15:13:06
Message-ID: 20190410151306.GA26795@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-Mar-31, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote:

> Alternative point of "if your database is super large and actively written,
> you may want to set autovacuum_freeze_max_age to even smaller values so
> that autovacuum load is more evenly spread over time" may be needed.

I don't think it's helpful to force emergency vacuuming more frequently;
quite the contrary, it's likely to cause even more issues. We should
tweak autovacuum to perform freezing more preemtively instead.

Álvaro Herrera
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2019-04-10 15:21:07 Re: Berserk Autovacuum (let's save next Mandrill)
Previous Message Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais 2019-04-10 14:57:11 Re: block-level incremental backup