| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Decoupling antiwraparound autovacuum from special rules around auto cancellation |
| Date: | 2023-01-19 22:51:18 |
| Message-ID: | 20230119225118.sgrxsr2lij7eqqzi@awork3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2023-01-19 13:36:41 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 12:58 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > There's absolutely no guarantee that autoanalyze is triggered
> > there. Particularly with repeated vacuums triggered due to an relfrozenxid age
> > that can't be advanced that very well might not happen within days on a large
> > relation.
>
> Arguments like that work far better as arguments in favor of the
> vac_estimate_reltuples heuristics.
I don't agree. But mainly my issue is that the devil you know (how this has
worked for a while) is preferrable to introducing an unknown quantity (your
patch that hasn't yet seen real world exposure).
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2023-01-19 22:54:52 | Re: Decoupling antiwraparound autovacuum from special rules around auto cancellation |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-01-19 22:44:14 | Re: DSA failed to allocate memory |