Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Chris Browne wrote:
>
>> It strikes me as a slick idea for autovacuum to take on that
>> behaviour. If the daily backup runs for 2h, then it is quite futile
>> to bother vacuuming a table multiple times during that 2h period when
>> none of the tuples obsoleted during the 2h period will be able to be
>> cleaned out until the end.
>
> Hmm, yeah, sounds useful. There's one implementation issue to notice
> however, and it's that the autovacuum process dies and restarts for each
> iteration, so there's no way for it to remember previous state unless
> it's saved somewhere permanent, as the stats info is.
>
> However this seems at least slightly redundant with the "maintenance
> window" feature -- you could set a high barrier to vacuum during the
> daily backup period instead. (Anybody up for doing this job?)

I can't promise anything, but it's on my list of things to hopefully
find time for in the coming months. No way I can start it in Feb, but
maybe sometime in March. Anyone else?

Matt