Re: autovacuum_work_mem - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: autovacuum_work_mem
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZSZCqCEeMajbQ3eJgT=7wexhhc6d3LH7bZhNme6sT+4TA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: autovacuum_work_mem  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> That's about 2-3 days work and I know Peter can hack it. So the
> situation is not perfection-sought-blocking-good, this is more like
> fairly poor solution being driven through when a better solution is
> available within the time and skills available.

I think that that's a very optimistic assessment of the amount of work
required. Even by the rose-tinted standards of software project time
estimation. A ton of data is required to justify fundamental
infrastructural changes like that.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Daniel Wood
Date:
Subject: 9.3 reference constraint regression
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: -d option for pg_isready is broken