On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 17:08 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> > On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 16:29 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> It'd make more sense to put the effort into developing
> >> better scheduling control over autovacuum, such as a concept of
> >> maintenance windows.
>
> > We need that as well, not instead of.
>
> I disagree; adding every frammish anyone could ever think of is not
> an overall improvement to the system.
I like your word frammish and am watchful of such things myself.
> My feeling is that we should be trying to eliminate use-cases for
> cron-driven vacuuming,
Agreed.
> not trying to make sure that cron-driven
> scripts can do anything autovacuum can.
I'm not in favour of limiting our capability to internal actions only.
If we add a capability for scheduling work, we can easily make it
capable of scheduling many kinds of work.
Writing an application maintenance utility in PL/pgSQL is much better
than having to write it for all the different servers an application may
need to run on. We can't ignore that many people use Windows.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
