Re: [pgsql-www] pg_autovacuum is nice ... but ...

"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> Moved to -hackers where this belongs :)

> On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Justin Clift wrote:
>> Would making max_fsm_relations and max_fsm_pages dynamically update
>> themselves whilst PostgreSQL runs be useful?

Possibly, but it isn't happening in the foreseeable future, for the same
reason that we don't auto-update shared_buffers and the other shared
memory sizing parameters: we can't resize shared memory on the fly.

> I'm not sure if I like this one too much ... but it would be nice if
> something like this triggered a warning in the logs, maybe a feature of
> pg_autovacuum itself?

autovacuum would probably be a reasonable place to put it. We don't
currently have any good way for autovacuum to get at the information,
but I suppose that an integrated autovacuum daemon could do so.

regards, tom lane