On Thursday 20 November 2003 20:29, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> On Thursday 20 November 2003 20:00, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
> > Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> > > I will submit a patch that would account deletes in analyze threshold.
> > > Since you want to delay the analyze, I would calculate analyze count as
> >
> > deletes are already accounted for in the analyze threshold.
>
> Yes. My bad. Deletes are not accounted in initializing analyze count but
> later they are used.
>
> > > I am still wary of inverting vacuum analyze frequency. You think it is
> > > better to set inverted default rather than documenting it?
> >
> > I think inverting the vacuum and analyze frequency is wrong.
>
> Me. Too. ATM all I can think of this patch attached. Josh, is it sufficient
> for you?..:-)
use this one. A warning added for too aggressive vacuumming. If it is OK by
everybody, we can send it to patches list.
Shridhar
