Thread: Re: [BUGS] fillfactor hides autovacuum parameters in 8.4.0

Re: [BUGS] fillfactor hides autovacuum parameters in 8.4.0

From
Itagaki Takahiro
Date:
Here is a patch to fix a bug in handling default values in reloptions.
This fix should be applied to HEAD and 8.4.0.

I used 'magic number -1' to propagate "not-specified" information to
autovacuum process. It might look strange because the default value is
out of range of the reloption, but I think it has less impact to the
codes comapred with other solutions (dynamic default values etc.).

> To fix the bug, each field in StdRdOptions should have "not-specified" flag.
> If not specified, autovacuum should use current GUC settings instead of
> reloptions. Is it possible to change the default values of reloptions
> to some magic number (-1 or so) ?

Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center


Attachment

Re: [BUGS] fillfactor hides autovacuum parameters in 8.4.0

From
Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> 
> Here is a patch to fix a bug in handling default values in reloptions.
> This fix should be applied to HEAD and 8.4.0.
> 
> I used 'magic number -1' to propagate "not-specified" information to
> autovacuum process. It might look strange because the default value is
> out of range of the reloption, but I think it has less impact to the
> codes comapred with other solutions (dynamic default values etc.).

I realized that any other solution here is going to be more complex and
thus less appropriate for backpatch.  I still don't like this very much
because it doesn't seem to offer enough flexibility to user-specified
reloptions; but any patch we come up with here is going to be applicable
to CVS HEAD.

So I'm going to apply your patch to both 8.4 and HEAD; we can always
improve it later, I guess.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.


Re: [BUGS] fillfactor hides autovacuum parameters in 8.4.0

From
Itagaki Takahiro
Date:
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:

> So I'm going to apply your patch to both 8.4 and HEAD; we can always
> improve it later, I guess.

Thank you for your applying.
I think the fix is ugly, too. We need to introduce cleaner solution for 8.5.

Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center