Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread
Date
Msg-id CAH2-WzkF9=LAPoVCGKd-q9AOJtJFzGt8vJ9Bdq=3KrAsrhm68w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 3:35 PM David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
> If we had the varying sleep time as I mentioned above, the
> failsafe code could even be removed as the
> "autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay / <tables score>" calculation would
> effectively zero the sleep time with any table > failsafe age.

I'm not sure what you mean by "the failsafe could be removed".
Importantly, the failsafe will abandon all further index vacuuming.
That's why it's presented as something that you as a user are not
supposed to rely on.

--
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Sami Imseih
Date:
Subject: Re: Bug in pg_stat_statements
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Instability of phycodorus in pg_upgrade tests with JIT