From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Visibility map and freezing |
Date: | 2009-01-16 11:07:58 |
Message-ID: | 87iqoffr01.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Jeff Davis wrote:
>> On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 13:49 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm now leaning towards:
>>>
>>> autovacuum_freeze_max_age
>>> vacuum_freeze_table_age
>>> vacuum_freeze_min_age
>>>
>>> where autovacuum_freeze_max_age and vacuum_freeze_min_age are unchanged, and
>>> vacuum_freeze_table_age is the new setting that controls when VACUUM or
>>> autovacuum should perform a full scan of the table to advance relfrozenxid.
>>
>> I'm still bothered by the fact that "max" and "min" really mean the same
>> thing here.
>
> Yeah. Those are existing names, though, and I don't recall any complaints from
> users.
>
>> I don't think we can perfectly capture the meaning of these GUCs in the
>> name. I think our goal should be to avoid confusion between them.
>
> Agreed.
I was thinking it would be clearer if the options which control *when*
autovacuum fires off a worker consistently had some action word in them like
"trigger" or "start" or "launch".
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2009-01-16 12:24:20 | Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch |
Previous Message | Zdenek Kotala | 2009-01-16 09:55:12 | links in buildfarms report are broken |