Re: maintenance_work_mem and autovacuum - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Guillaume Smet
Subject Re: maintenance_work_mem and autovacuum
Date
Msg-id 1d4e0c10903261146t7de7f195v8d2f392779f56f2b@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to maintenance_work_mem and autovacuum  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: maintenance_work_mem and autovacuum  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Why do we have separate parameters for autovacuum and vacuum, except for
> maintenance_work_mem?
>
> Should we also have autovacuum_work_mem?

We already discussed it here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/49353A69.20001@hagander.net

It resulted in a doc patch - not sure it's sufficient but it's
interesting to read this thread before discussing further.

-- 
Guillaume


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: maintenance_work_mem and autovacuum
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: 8.4 open items list updated