Re: New GUC autovacuum_max_threshold ? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Banck
Subject Re: New GUC autovacuum_max_threshold ?
Date
Msg-id 662b6101.170a0220.12877.a359@mx.google.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: New GUC autovacuum_max_threshold ?  (Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 04:24:45AM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-04-25 at 14:33 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Another reason, at least in existing releases, is that at some
> > point index vacuuming hits a wall because we run out of space for dead
> > tuples. We *most definitely* want to do index vacuuming before we get
> > to the point where we're going to have to do multiple cycles of index
> > vacuuming.
> 
> That is more convincing.  But do we need a GUC for that?  What about
> making a table eligible for autovacuum as soon as the number of dead
> tuples reaches 90% of what you can hold in "autovacuum_work_mem"?

Due to the improvements in v17, this would basically never trigger
accordings to my understanding, or at least only after an excessive
amount of bloat has been accumulated.


Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)"
Date:
Subject: RE: Improving the latch handling between logical replication launcher and worker processes.
Next
From: Frédéric Yhuel
Date:
Subject: Re: New GUC autovacuum_max_threshold ?