Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> On Thu, 2006-02-23 at 11:54 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Hmm .... it'd probably be a good idea to force zero_damaged_pages OFF in
>>> the autovac subprocess. That parameter is only intended for interactive
>>> use --- as you say, autovac would be a rather nasty loose cannon if it
>>> fired up with this parameter ON.
> I am wondering if we should prevent autovac from running if
> zero_damaged_pages is set in postgresql.conf.
What's wrong with just turning it off locally in the autovac process?
If the admin prefers autovac not run at all while he's fooling around,
he can disable it in postgresql.conf (or perhaps even better, run in
single-user mode). But I don't think it's appropriate to force that
decision on him.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2006-02-28 19:48:31|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Config file for psql|
|Previous:||From: Greg Stark||Date: 2006-02-28 19:25:12|
|Subject: Re: Dead Space Map|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2006-02-28 19:49:02|
|Subject: Re: [PATCH] Prompt for password on Windows platforms |
|Previous:||From: Neil Conway||Date: 2006-02-28 19:29:50|
|Subject: Re: <> operator|