Re: PG17 optimizations to vacuum - Mailing list pgsql-general

On Sun, Sep 1, 2024 at 5:44 PM Pavel Luzanov <p.luzanov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> I see a perfectly working TID-store optimization.
> With reduced maintenance_work_mem it used only one 'vacuuming indexes'
> phase instead of 21 in v16.
> But I also expected to see a reduction in the number of WAL records
> and the total size of the WAL. Instead, WAL numbers have significantly
> degraded.
>
> What am I doing wrong?

That does seem weird.

CC'ing the authors of the relevant VACUUM enhancements.

--
Peter Geoghegan