Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables

Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > Instead, what I propose (and is not really in the patch), as a
> > backpatchable item, is an approach in which the functions to compute
> > each rel's Browne strength and sort are hooks. Normal behavior is not
> > to sort at all, as currently, and sites that have a problem with the
> > current random order can install a custom module that provide hooks to
> > change ordering as they see fit. So behavior won't change for people
> > who have no problem today.
>
> Meh. I'm not really thrilled with adding hooks (that presumably we'd
> have to preserve forever) to solve a short-term problem. Nor does this
> sound hugely convenient for users with the problem, anyway. Do we even
> know for sure that anyone would create such modules?

Well, I would. Providing a custom module is many times more convenient
than providing a patched binary. But since there seems to be
considerable resistance to the idea I will drop it, unless others vote
in favour.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services