Re: Planning to change autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor value to zero. Please suggest me if any negative impact.

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Raghavendra Rao J S V <raghavendrajsv(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Planning to change autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor value to zero. Please suggest me if any negative impact.
Date: 2018-04-11 11:01:19
Message-ID: 1523444479.2428.27.camel@cybertec.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Raghavendra Rao J S V wrote:
> Are you suggesting me to keep "autovacuum_vacuum_cost_limit" to zero or
> " autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor" to zero or both? Please clarify me.

autovacuum_vacuum_cost_limit is effectively 100 by default.
You could raise it to 2000 or more.

If that does not take care of your problems, set autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay to 0.

That will make autovacuum even more aggressive.

Do *not* set autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor to 0. That will just cause autovacuum
to run all the time without getting anywhere. Sorry for trying to use irony in
e-mail; I am aware I shouldn't do that.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe
--
Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2018-04-11 12:35:18 Re: psql variable to plpgsql?
Previous Message Alexander Farber 2018-04-11 10:44:12 Re: Multiple records returned by a JOIN