Re: new vacuum is slower for small tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: new vacuum is slower for small tables
Date
Msg-id 24912.1228749203@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: new vacuum is slower for small tables  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> In the end, it would be better if this function was not called at all
> for user-invoked vacuum, and have autovacuum handle it.  However, that
> doesn't work for people who disable autovacuum.

A possible variant on that is to invoke it only in database-wide
vacuums, ie not when you specify a single target table.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: new vacuum is slower for small tables
Next
From: ohp@pyrenet.fr
Date:
Subject: Re: cvs head initdb hangs on unixware