| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Return of the Solaris vacuum polling problem -- anyone remember this? |
| Date: | 2010-08-23 19:25:13 |
| Message-ID: | 201008231925.o7NJPDD16301@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of lun ago 23 14:55:55 -0400 2010:
>
> > OK, I have attached a proposed patch to improve this. I moved the
> > pg_clog mention to a new paragraph and linked it to the reason the
> > default is relatively low.
> >
> > Comments?
>
> I think the new para doesn't make much sense, in context. Why does it
> say "freeze"? How can we expect users to understand how that is
> related to this parameter?
I have removed the freeze mention per Tom's comment and posted an
updated version that removes the 'freeze' wording. Are there other
changes needed?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-08-23 19:25:54 | Re: WIP: extensible enums |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-08-23 19:24:21 | Re: Return of the Solaris vacuum polling problem -- anyone remember this? |