Simon, is this patch ready to be added to the patch queue? I assume not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 09:14 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 16:21 +0900, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
>
> > > With the default
> > > value of scan_recycle_buffers(=0), VACUUM seems to use all of buffers in pool,
> > > just like existing sequential scans. Is this intended?
> >
> > Yes, but its not very useful for testing to have done that. I'll do
> > another version within the hour that sets N=0 (only) back to current
> > behaviour for VACUUM.
>
> New test version enclosed, where scan_recycle_buffers = 0 doesn't change
> existing VACUUM behaviour.
>
> --
> Simon Riggs
> EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
>
[ Attachment, skipping... ]
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
