Re: Parallel VACUUM in feature matrix on website

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Parallel VACUUM in feature matrix on website
Date: 2015-09-28 17:22:53
Message-ID: 5609776D.8080809@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On 09/27/2015 12:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Also, I think "WAL Buffer auto-tuning" should be cut. It doesn't
> warrant inclusion here. There are one or two other items that should
> be pruned too, but less obviously so.
>

I disagree here; I think that anything which eliminates a need for
manual tuning is a significant feature. Expecially if you're looking at
the chart and trying to remember "hey, do I need to tune checkpoint
segments on this version?"

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Darren Duncan 2015-09-28 20:43:21 Re: Parallel VACUUM in feature matrix on website
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2015-09-27 20:45:40 Re: Parallel VACUUM in feature matrix on website