On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 1:00 PM Ahmed Yarub Hani Al Nuaimi <ahmedyarubhani@gmail.com> wrote: > That is a very useful thread and I'll keep on following it but it is not exactly what I'm trying to achieve here. > You see, there is a great difference between VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY and adding compaction to lazy vacuuming. The main factor here is resource utilization: a lot of companies have enough data that would need days to be vacuumed concurrently. Is the implementation discussed there pausable or at least cancellable? Does it take into account periods of high resource utilization by user-generated queries?
If you want to discuss the patch on the other thread, you should go read that thread and perhaps reply there, rather than replying to this message. It's important to keep all of the discussion of a certain patch together, which doesn't happen if you reply like this.
Also, you've already been asked not to top-post and you just did it again, so I'm guessing that you don't know what is meant by the term. So please read this:
If you're going to post to this mailing list, it is important to understand the conventions and expectations that people have here. If you insist on doing things differently than what everyone else does, you're going to annoy a lot of people.
Oh I'm so sorry for the top-posting. I didn't even notice the warning before. I'm not discussing exactly what is in that thread but rather an alternative implementation. That being said, I'll do my own research, try to get a working implementation and then come back to this thread.
