Re: Rethinking autovacuum.c memory handling

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Rethinking autovacuum.c memory handling
Date: 2017-09-23 17:36:23
Message-ID: 15155.1506188183@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> writes:
> This looks reasonable to me as well. I haven't noticed any issues after
> a couple hours of pgbench with aggressive autovacuum settings, either.

Thanks for looking. As I'm sure you realize, what motivated that was
not liking the switch into AutovacMemCxt that you'd added in
autovacuum_do_vac_analyze ... with this patch, we can drop that.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bossart, Nathan 2017-09-23 17:40:12 Re: Rethinking autovacuum.c memory handling
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-09-23 17:28:56 Re: Rethinking autovacuum.c memory handling