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

From Nathan Bossart
Subject Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread
Date
Msg-id abGmNAVIPSqX124E@nathan
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread  (Sami Imseih <samimseih@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 12:08:52PM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote:
> The main issue is that the scores can reach quadrillions, or even billions,
> which feels excessive, especially if exposed in DEBUG3 or in a future
> prioritization view.

But why is that an issue?  Because the number looks big when there's
extremely verbose logging enabled?  I'm not following your objection.  IMHO
we _want_ the score to be excessively high in these cases so that there's
basically zero chance a table with unreasonable bloat takes priority.  This
was discussed a bit upthread [0].

[0] https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvqrd%3DSHVUytdRj55OWnLH98Rvtzqam5zq2f4XKRZa7t9Q%40mail.gmail.com

-- 
nathan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: on SGML files is used for what ?
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: Change initdb default to the builtin collation provider