Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age?

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age?
Date: 2023-04-20 22:51:54
Message-ID: 20230420225154.GA1437940@nathanxps13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 03:07:37PM -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> +1.

+1. I agree with the upthread discussion and support removing
vacuum_defer_cleanup_age.

--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2023-04-20 23:32:43 Re: [PATCH] Extend the length of BackgroundWorker.bgw_library_name
Previous Message Melanie Plageman 2023-04-20 22:51:19 Re: Memory leak from ExecutorState context?