| From: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>, Jeremy Schneider <schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread |
| Date: | 2026-03-11 00:11:27 |
| Message-ID: | CAA5RZ0seLxDmH9UftUA3vS8DrW+7T9HV5XK8yAuQxA8BaRkg2g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Here's an updated patch with new GUCs that control how much each component
> contributes to the autovacuum score for a table. They default to 1.0, but
> can be set anywhere from 0.0 to 1.0 (inclusive). In theory, setting all of
> them to 0.0 should restore the original pg_class order prioritization that
> we have today. I haven't added corresponding reloptions for these GUCs, as
> I'm not convinced we need them, but I can add them if folks think they
> would be useful.
Starting with GUCs is OK by me.
Just a few things:
1/
+ Oid xid_age;
+ Oid mxid_age;
Is using Oid here intentional? I'm curious why not use uint32 for clarity?
2/
The new GUC docs says "...component of the score...", but without
introducing the concept of the prioritization score.
I think we should expand a bit more on this topic to help a user
understand and tune these more effectively. Attached is my
proposal for the docs. I tried to keep it informative without
being too verbose, and avoided making specific recommendations.
--
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v1-0001-autovacuum-scheduling-improvements-docs.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.5 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2026-03-11 00:16:50 | Re: Streamify more code paths |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2026-03-11 00:05:22 | Re: A stack allocation API |