| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: autovacuum maintenance_work_mem |
| Date: | 2010-11-16 18:44:06 |
| Message-ID: | 1289933046.10258.2511.camel@jd-desktop |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 10:36 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 11/16/10 9:27 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > I'm a little skeptical about creating more memory tunables. DBAs who
> > are used to previous versions of PG will find that their vacuum is now
> > really slow, because they adjusted maintenance_work_mem but not this
>
> Also, generally people who are using autovacuum don't do much manual
> vacuuming, and when they do, it's easy enough to do a SET before you
> issue the VACUUM statement.
>
> So, -1 for yet another GUC.
Agreed. If we are going to do anything, it should be pushed to a per
object level (at least table) with ALTER TABLE. We don't need yet
another global variable.
JD
--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-11-16 18:46:24 | Re: GiST insert algorithm rewrite |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-11-16 18:39:46 | Re: autovacuum maintenance_work_mem |