| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: allow changing autovacuum_max_workers without restarting |
| Date: | 2025-04-29 17:24:06 |
| Message-ID: | aBELNrA_h4NKtTLi@nathan |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 01:19:18PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
>> On 28.04.25 16:41, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>>> However, weren't we considering reverting some of this stuff [0]? I see
>>> that sawshark is now choosing max_connections = 40 and
>>> autovacuum_worker_slots = 6, and since there are no other apparent related
>>> buildfarm failures, I'm assuming that nobody else is testing the 60
>>> semaphores case anymore.
>>>
>>> [0] https://postgr.es/m/618497.1742347456%40sss.pgh.pa.us
>
>> (I don't have any thoughts on this.)
>
> Andres seemed lukewarm about reverting 38da05346 or 6d0154196, so
> I left it be for the moment. But I still feel the argument is good
> that "these will do little except confuse future hackers". Barring
> objection, I'll go revert them.
+1, I almost threatened the same but wasn't totally positive where the
discussion stood.
--
nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2025-04-29 17:25:00 | Re: Slot's restart_lsn may point to removed WAL segment after hard restart unexpectedly |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2025-04-29 17:19:18 | Re: allow changing autovacuum_max_workers without restarting |