Re: Autovacuum on by default?

From: "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Autovacuum on by default?
Date: 2006-08-17 16:55:48
Message-ID: 44E49F94.3080209@zeut.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
>
>> Would be fine by me, but I'm curious to see what the community has to
>> say. A few comments:
>>
>> Autovacuum can cause unpredictable performance issues, that is if it
>> vacuums in the middle of a busy day and people don't want that, of
>> course they turn it off easy enough, but they might be surprised.
>>
>> I haven't played with CVS HEAD much, but I think the logging issue has
>> been addressed no? That is my single biggest gripe with the 8.1
>> autovacuum is that it's very hard to see if it's actually done anything
>> without having to turn up the logging significantly.
>>
>
> This has not been addressed, except that pg_stat_activity now shows
> autovacuum. Someone was going to work on per-module log output, but it
> wasn't completed for 8.2. Does pg_stat_activity now show the table
> being vacuumed?

Hmm... I though it had, not the full blown per-module log output stuff,
but just a simple reorgainzing of the log levels for autovacuum
messages. That is lowering the level for:
LOG: autovacuum: processing database "foo"
and increasing the log level when autovacuum actually fires off a VACUUM
or ANALYZE command.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2006-08-17 16:56:09 Re: pgsql-patches reply-to (was Re: [PATCHES] selecting
Previous Message Chris Mair 2006-08-17 16:54:28 Re: [HACKERS] selecting large result sets in psql using