Josh, all,
* Josh Berkus (josh@agliodbs.com) wrote:
> Yeah, I can't believe I'm calling for *yet another* configuration
> variable either. Suggested workaround fixes very welcome.
As I suggested on IRC, my thought would be to have a goal-based system
for autovacuum which is similar to our goal-based commit system. We
don't need autovacuum sucking up all the I/O in the box, nor should we
ask the users to manage that. Instead, let's decide when the autovacuum
on a given table needs to finish and then plan to keep on working at a
rate that'll allow us to get done well in advance of that deadline.
Just my 2c.
Thanks,
Stephen
