Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
>
>> The major reasons for autovacuum as I see it are as follows:
>>
>> * Reduces administrative overhead having to keep track of what tables
>> need to be vacuumed how often.
>
>
> Creates more overhead and thus reduces performance.
In the general case, I disagree. Overall having your tables vacuumed
and analyzed only when needed and never when not needed can only reduce
system overhead. Granted there are limitations in the contrib version
of autovacuum, some of which go away in the integrated case.
>> * Reduces the total amount of time the system spends vacuuming since
>> it only vacuums when needed.
>
> Can be easily done with cron.
Really? What happens when your load / usage patterns change? When a
table is added that gets heavily used?
>> * Keeps stats up-to-date automatically
>
>
> Which can be done with cron
Same response as above.
>> * Eliminates newbie confusion
>
>
> RTFM
;-)
>> * Eliminates one of the criticisms that the public has against
>> PostgreSQL (justifed or not)
>
>
> Agreed.
>
>
> Just so everyone knows from the get go here. I am purposely playing a
> little devils advocate. Autovacuum has some drawbacks. I think we should
> be **publicly** aware of them before we pursue integration.
Understood.
