From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Finalizing read stream users' flag choices |
Date: | 2025-04-08 17:12:48 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYm14mCPvinc8DCs7_aUR1M1NPmQpWND=r_j8ysaMLv6Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 12:07 PM Melanie Plageman
<melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> We've said before that maintenance_io_concurrency should govern work
> done on behalf of many different sessions. That was said to include at
> least vacuum and recovery. I need to change the index vacuum users to
> use READ_STREAM_MAINTENANCE. But I wonder about the other users like
> amcheck and autoprewarm.
autoprewarm, and possibly regular prewarm, seem like maintenance to
me. amcheck does not.
Otherwise, the choices you've made about what is maintenance seem
reasonable to me, based on the list you included further down in the
email.
I don't know enough to opine on the questions about full vs. default,
or sequential scans.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2025-04-08 17:13:46 | Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER |
Previous Message | Wolfgang Walther | 2025-04-08 17:10:07 | Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER |