Re: VACUUM DELAY

From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
To: Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: VACUUM DELAY
Date: 2004-08-09 17:44:59
Message-ID: 4117B81B.7080403@Yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 8/9/2004 1:19 PM, Gaetano Mendola wrote:

> Jan Wieck wrote:
>
>> On 8/9/2004 7:19 AM, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> I have seen the big debat about to have the delay
>>> off or on by default.
>>>
>>> Why not enable it by default and introduce a new
>>> parameter to vacuum command itself ? Something like:
>>>
>>>
>>> VACUUM .... WITH DELAY 100;
>>
>>
>> It's not just one parameter to tune here. It is a set of parameters that
>> all together need to be viewed as a whole. The slowdown will be affected
>> by the other parameters as well, so turning the millisecond knob only is
>> not even half of the story.
>
> So the other parameter will inserted in the new sintax too, I think is fundamental
> the ability of override this values during the vacuum call:
>
> VACUUM .... WITH DELAY 100 [ .... ];

You can do it right now.

set vacuum_cost_delay = 100;
vacuum analyze;

No need to panic.

Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message James William Pye 2004-08-09 17:48:50 Re: Postgres development model (was Re: CVS comment)
Previous Message James William Pye 2004-08-09 17:32:06 Re: SRFs ExecMakeTableFunctionResult