Re: Do we reduce autovacuum_naptime max values

From: Virender Singla <virender(dot)cse(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: wenhui qiu <qiuwenhuifx(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Do we reduce autovacuum_naptime max values
Date: 2026-09-18 10:37:48
Message-ID: CAM6Zo8wM8KgrnLeTQDK0R7-Tj2bGotAABob3CBWC5MUKBA57uw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I have seen similar issues with other flags. Specifically, without
careful consultation of the documentation, it is easy to misconfigure
these parameters due to the varying default unit semantics.

This made me think about the vacuum failsafe mechanism. Although the
failsafe successfully overrides certain cost and delay restrictions to
speed up anti-wraparound vacuuming once a vacuum process kicks in, an
accidentally high naptime creates a scheduling bottleneck. It prevents
the launcher from initiating the autovacuum processes in the first
place.

Thanks,
Virender

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2026-09-18 10:41:32 Re: Distinguish publication exclusions in object addresses
Previous Message CharSyam 2026-09-18 10:31:04 [PATCH] Reject nonpositive Bloom filter element estimates