Re: New GUC autovacuum_max_threshold ?

From: Frédéric Yhuel <frederic(dot)yhuel(at)dalibo(dot)com>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, wenhui qiu <qiuwenhuifx(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New GUC autovacuum_max_threshold ?
Date: 2025-01-08 13:48:10
Message-ID: 93f3dab5-caa4-4213-9be0-855d5aaa19bf@dalibo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 1/7/25 23:57, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Here is a rebased patch for cfbot. AFAICT we are still pretty far from
> consensus on which approach to take, unfortunately.
>

For what it's worth, although I would have preferred the sub-linear
growth thing, I'd much rather have this than nothing.

And I have to admit that the proposed formulas were either too
convoluted or wrong.

This very patch is more straightforward. Please let me know if I can
help and how.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Diego Fronza 2025-01-08 13:52:30 Logical replication - proposal for a custom conflict resolution function
Previous Message Dean Rasheed 2025-01-08 13:43:57 Re: psql: Option to use expanded mode for various meta-commands