Re: [Open Item] Re: Autovacuum on by default?

From: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [Open Item] Re: Autovacuum on by default?
Date: 2006-08-26 12:51:04
Message-ID: 87r6z3y81z.fsf@wolfe.cbbrowne.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net (Peter Eisentraut) would write:
> Jim C. Nasby wrote:
>> I thought we had agreed it would be a good idea to turn autovac_delay
>> on?
>
> We had not, because there was no experience available about where to put
> the default numbers.

I would also not because for Very Large Tables, the delay may make
vacuums run really inordinately long. And that becomes an "evil big
long-running transaction" to worsen things.
--
(format nil "~S(at)~S" "cbbrowne" "gmail.com")
http://cbbrowne.com/info/internet.html
Signs of a Klingon Programmer - 2. "Specifications are for the weak
and timid!"

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Markus Schiltknecht 2006-08-26 13:06:59 Re: integration of pgcluster into postgresql
Previous Message Jonah H. Harris 2006-08-26 12:44:07 Re: integration of pgcluster into postgresql