Hi,
On April 10, 2019 8:13:06 AM PDT, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>On 2019-Mar-31, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote:
>
>> Alternative point of "if your database is super large and actively
>written,
>> you may want to set autovacuum_freeze_max_age to even smaller values
>so
>> that autovacuum load is more evenly spread over time" may be needed.
>
>I don't think it's helpful to force emergency vacuuming more
>frequently;
>quite the contrary, it's likely to cause even more issues. We should
>tweak autovacuum to perform freezing more preemtively instead.
I still think the fundamental issue with making vacuum less painful is that the all indexes have to be read entirely.
Evenif there's not much work (say millions of rows frozen, hundreds removed). Without that issue we could vacuum much
morefrequently. And do it properly in insert only workloads.
Andres
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
