| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Darafei Komяpa Praliaskouski <me(at)komzpa(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Berserk Autovacuum (let's save next Mandrill) |
| Date: | 2020-03-25 19:26:41 |
| Message-ID: | 20200325192641.cj3up5c5koqgyppb@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2020-03-25 11:05:21 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Since we talked about how scale_factor can be used to effectively disable this
> new feature, I thought that scale=100 was too small and suggesed 1e10 (same as
> max for vacuum_cleanup_index_scale_factor since 4d54543ef). That should allow
> handling the case that analyze is disabled, or its threshold is high, or it
> hasn't run yet, or it's running but hasn't finished, or analyze is triggered as
> same time as vacuum.
For disabling we instead should allow -1, and disable the feature if set
to < 0.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2020-03-25 19:27:28 | Re: Include sequence relation support in logical replication |
| Previous Message | James Coleman | 2020-03-25 19:24:44 | Re: [DOC] Document concurrent index builds waiting on each other |