Re: autovacuum_work_mem - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: autovacuum_work_mem
Date
Msg-id 52A8B074.2080608@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to autovacuum_work_mem  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Responses Re: autovacuum_work_mem
List pgsql-hackers
On 12/11/2013 09:57 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I don't agree with that assessment.  Anything that involves changing
> the scheduling of autovacuum is a major project that will legitimately
> provoke much controversy.  Extensive testing will be needed to prove
> that the new algorithm doesn't perform worse than the current
> algorithm in any important cases.  I have my doubts about whether that
> can be accomplished in an entire release cycle, let alone 2-3 days.
> In contrast, the patch proposed does something that is easy to
> understand, clearly safe, and an improvement over what we have now.

+1

There is an inherent tuning and troubleshooting challenge in anything
involving a feedback loop.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: In-Memory Columnar Store
Next
From: Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Date:
Subject: Re: Time-Delayed Standbys