| From: | "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Rethinking autovacuum.c memory handling |
| Date: | 2017-09-23 17:40:12 |
| Message-ID: | 2E010582-FC1A-49E3-9256-F65DC9823219@amazon.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/23/17, 12:36 PM, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>"Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> writes:
>> This looks reasonable to me as well. I haven't noticed any issues after
>> a couple hours of pgbench with aggressive autovacuum settings, either.
>
> Thanks for looking. As I'm sure you realize, what motivated that was
> not liking the switch into AutovacMemCxt that you'd added in
> autovacuum_do_vac_analyze ... with this patch, we can drop that.
Yup. I’ll go ahead and update that patch now.
Nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2017-09-23 17:48:23 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-09-23 17:36:23 | Re: Rethinking autovacuum.c memory handling |