Re: Missing mention of autovacuum_work_mem

From: "nikolai(dot)berkoff" <nikolai(dot)berkoff(at)pm(dot)me>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: "pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Missing mention of autovacuum_work_mem
Date: 2021-09-20 13:40:38
Message-ID: 2a_0HzEWsHbu9VVZKMxdZ-YxVvFqamXG4crWy1xNkE4NIF-VjRuquYqzrNzmq8-2kJorJymk1D7CDbC2JgYA-BBGibPcxzWQ6R1WTtGMacE=@pm.me
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

> Why not keep it simple with
>

> "If a table has any indexes, this will happen at least once per vacuum,
>

> after the heap has been completely scanned. It may happen multiple times per
>

> vacuum if maintenance_work_mem (or, in the case of autovacuum,
>

> autovacuum_work_mem) is insufficient to store the number of dead
>

> tuples found."

Thank you Laurenz,

Yes that reads better still.

Regards,

Nikolai

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PG Doc comments form 2021-09-22 10:20:21 Default include_dir behaviour
Previous Message Laurenz Albe 2021-09-20 13:09:36 Re: Missing mention of autovacuum_work_mem