Re: Parallel VACUUM in feature matrix on website - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: Parallel VACUUM in feature matrix on website
Date
Msg-id 5609776D.8080809@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Parallel VACUUM in feature matrix on website  (Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Parallel VACUUM in feature matrix on website
List pgsql-advocacy
On 09/27/2015 12:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Also, I think "WAL Buffer auto-tuning" should be cut. It doesn't
> warrant inclusion here. There are one or two other items that should
> be pruned too, but less obviously so.
>

I disagree here; I think that anything which eliminates a need for
manual tuning is a significant feature.  Expecially if you're looking at
the chart and trying to remember "hey, do I need to tune checkpoint
segments on this version?"

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


pgsql-advocacy by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel VACUUM in feature matrix on website
Next
From: Darren Duncan
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel VACUUM in feature matrix on website