Re: Remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age
Date: 2016-10-18 21:30:45
Message-ID: 961c72cb-9ed1-7351-6834-2188d0f983c0@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 10/18/2016 01:37 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2016-10-09 21:51:07 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Given that hot_standby_feedback is pretty bulletproof now, and a lot of
>> the work in reducing replay conflicts, I think the utility of
>> vacuum_defer_cleanup_age is at an end. I really meant so submit a patch
>> to remove it to 9.6, but it got away from me.
>
> HS feedback doesn't e.g. work well with delayed and/or archived replay,
> whereas defer_cleanup does.

Oh, point! See, that's why I polled, I knew there was something I was
forgetting about.

> On the other hand, removing it would make some of the reasoning around
> GetOldestXmin() a bit easier.

Enough to make it worth breaking the above?

--
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Korotkov 2016-10-18 21:46:18 Re: Indirect indexes
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-10-18 21:28:09 Re: "make check" and pg_hba.conf