Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade vs vacuum_cost_delay

From: Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade vs vacuum_cost_delay
Date: 2023-11-24 10:21:01
Message-ID: 6560790d.170a0220.a3a77.76f8@mx.google.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 11:23:34PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> + Non-zero values of
> + <varname>vacuum_cost_delay</varname> will delay statistics generation.

Now I wonder wheter vacuumdb maybe should have an option to explicitly
force vacuum_cost_delay to 0 (I don't think it has?)?

Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alena Rybakina 2023-11-24 10:26:53 Re: Reducing memory consumed by RestrictInfo list translations in partitionwise join planning
Previous Message Alena Rybakina 2023-11-24 10:20:52 Re: Reducing memory consumed by RestrictInfo list translations in partitionwise join planning