Re: Autovacuum Improvements

Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:

> Now we have at least one different model, lets mix in other captures and
> situations. So it cannot be done with only YOUR data, I fully agree.
> But if you have sufficient data you can find the generalization of the
> model to make it work (resonable) in sufficient situations.
> Of course models need time to evolve, but so does the implementation
> currently at a slow rate. From do it yourself, to scripts, to the
> current autovacuum integration (which is good). From doing all tables
> sequentially to having some intelligence by update thresholds, to what
> will be next.
>
> I think you should better solve the problem is this ways, as models are
> relative easy to compare compared to arguments without
> analyzable/simulatible data.

To be frank, I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. I'm
sure more analysis is good; that's easy to agree with.

However, I don't want to be trapped in a design that's too hard to
implement, or too hard for DBAs to manage. There have been proposals to
add these knobs:

- maximum number of simultaneous processes (and make it more than 1)
- times of day on which to change parameters (i.e. disable vacuum
altogether, or make it more agressive or less)

Do you have further ideas?

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support