Re: Why vacuum_freeze_table_age etc. doc in "Statement Behavior" section?

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why vacuum_freeze_table_age etc. doc in "Statement Behavior" section?
Date: 2016-02-24 05:52:22
Message-ID: CAB7nPqTfEEED6gyK9z-qNEEirE39POU4zw9Aw1MuyS=2pMdC-A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> The explanations for vacuum_freeze_table_age etc. are in the section
> "Statement Behavior", which is a subsection of "Client Connection
> Defaults". To me vacuum_freeze_table_age etc. are totally unrelated
> to "Client Connection Defaults".
>
> I think "Resource Consumption" section is more appropriate for their
> place. There's already a section "Cost-based Vacuum Delay". Maybe we
> can add a new section for below under "Resource Consumption" something
> like "Managing Vacuum Freeze".
>
> vacuum_freeze_min_age
> vacuum_freeze_table_age
> vacuum_multixact_freeze_min_age
> vacuum_multixact_freeze_table_age

Those are parameters related controlling the way the query VACUUM
behaves, that's why they are placed where they are now, but so do the
cost-based parameters. So +1 for a new section under Resource
Consumption".
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-02-24 05:56:50 Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2016-02-24 05:40:36 Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby