From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: new GUC var: autovacuum_process_all_tables |
Date: | 2009-02-05 21:25:53 |
Message-ID: | 20090205212553.GF3064@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 17:45 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > For this we'd have a separate GUC parameter, as in $SUBJECT (I'm not
> > wedded to the name), and have the user set autovacuum_enabled=true via
> > reloptions to enable it.
>
> I would prefer it if that behaviour was enabled by putting a special
> entry into pg_autovacuum,
So you're not aware that we're doing away with pg_autovacuum for good?
It's going to be replaced by reloptions, i.e.
ALTER TABLE foo SET (autovacuum_enabled = false);
Obviously there's no way to add a "catchall" setting.
> e.g.
> "ALL TABLES", autovacuum_enabled=false
>
> I don't really want more GUCs for every nuance of AV behaviour.
In any case I fail to see how is this much different from a new GUC var.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-02-05 21:29:40 | Re: new GUC var: autovacuum_process_all_tables |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-02-05 21:16:31 | Re: new GUC var: autovacuum_process_all_tables |