From: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: autovacuum process handling |
Date: | 2007-01-22 22:04:28 |
Message-ID: | 45B534EC.5090105@zeut.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> This is how I think autovacuum should change with an eye towards being
> able to run multiple vacuums simultaneously:
>
[snip details]
>
> Does this raise some red flags? It seems straightforward enough to me;
> I'll submit a patch implementing this, so that scheduling will continue
> to be as it is today. Thus the scheduling discussions are being
> deferred until they can be actually useful and implementable.
I can't really speak to the PostgreSQL signaling innards, but this sound
logical to me. I think having the worker processes be children of the
postmaster and having them be single-minded (or single-tasked) also
makes a lot of sense.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2007-01-22 22:15:10 | Re: 10 weeks to feature freeze (Pending Work) |
Previous Message | Joris Dobbelsteen | 2007-01-22 21:15:55 | Re: [HACKERS] Autovacuum Improvements |