Re: vacuum_cost_limit doc description patch

From: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Martín Marqués <martin(dot)marques(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: vacuum_cost_limit doc description patch
Date: 2018-04-11 05:04:33
Message-ID: CAKJS1f9ofABS2C=nvpfhsQxZdiR=b_6FjKRnoUkM1wPnzhA+7Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11 April 2018 at 09:13, Martín Marqués <martin(dot)marques(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> This is a patch to add some further description, plus the upper and
> lower limits it has.

Hi,

+ for vacuum_cost_delay. The parameter can take a value
between 1 and 10000.

vacuum_cost_delay should be in <varname> tags.

+1 to mentioning that we sleep for vacuum_cost_delay, but I just don't
see many other GUCs with mention of their supported range.

effective_io_concurrency mentions the range it supports, but this
happens to depend on USE_POSIX_FADVISE, which if undefined the maximum
setting is 0, which means the docs are wrong in some cases on that.

vacuum_cost_limit seems fairly fixed at 0-10000 with no compile-time
conditions, so perhaps it's okay, providing we remember and update the
docs if that ever changes.

--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2018-04-11 05:22:29 Re: Boolean partitions syntax
Previous Message Huong Dangminh 2018-04-11 04:54:17 RE: power() function in Windows: "value out of range: underflow"