| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeremy Schneider <schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com>, Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread |
| Date: | 2025-10-24 21:13:53 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WzkF9=LAPoVCGKd-q9AOJtJFzGt8vJ9Bdq=3KrAsrhm68w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 3:35 PM David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> If we had the varying sleep time as I mentioned above, the
> failsafe code could even be removed as the
> "autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay / <tables score>" calculation would
> effectively zero the sleep time with any table > failsafe age.
I'm not sure what you mean by "the failsafe could be removed".
Importantly, the failsafe will abandon all further index vacuuming.
That's why it's presented as something that you as a user are not
supposed to rely on.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-10-24 21:31:59 | Re: Instability of phycodorus in pg_upgrade tests with JIT |
| Previous Message | Sami Imseih | 2025-10-24 21:04:20 | Re: Bug in pg_stat_statements |