From: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jharris(at)tvi(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | Yann Michel <yann-postgresql(at)spline(dot)de> |
Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: User Quota Implementation |
Date: | 2005-06-14 15:31:11 |
Message-ID: | 42AEF83F.40300@tvi.edu |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
So, are we going to go with 90% or 95% as the assumed assumption for a
warning :)
Yann Michel wrote:
>>I'd like to avoid a GUC for "percent_full_warning" if we can. Can anyone
>>see a way around this? Should we just assume 90% full?
>>
>>
>
>Well, it was only an idea of not leaving the admin out in the rain but
>giving im a hint by time of what might happen if there was no action. I
>have absolutely no idea if it is usefull of introducing a new GUC or
>setting this value to a fixed size of 90 or whatever percent. Maybe 95
>percent are enough, too?
>
>Regards,
>Yann
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-06-14 16:50:54 | Re: User Quota Implementation |
Previous Message | David Siebert | 2005-06-14 14:36:42 | Re: pg_dumpall not working? |