| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Advocacy Group <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Top features in 9.6? |
| Date: | 2016-04-12 12:37:40 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoao9hc2yz9pTa4QL1B4vBRCTL8+kO5kq8zeahfW0_kE9w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 3:21 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> I think that may turn out to be one of those "hidden gems" of this release.
> As in being the one that nobody talks about now, but then a few years down
> the road it's the one that everybody talks about. But it's somewhat hard to
> explain to people who (1) don't know how the system really works (though
> that would count for things like snapshot too old as well) or (2) actually
> have run into the current problem (why hey, that's also the same with
> snapshot too old)
Agreed. Unfortunately, for many people, the first time they really
become aware of autovacuum is when all of their tables hit the freeze
threshold for the first time. And this doesn't help with that. You
still have to scan everything after 200 million transactions; it's
just that you no longer have to do it again every 200 million
transactions after that. I still think it's a great feature, though.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Clift | 2016-04-12 12:59:48 | Re: Top features in 9.6? |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2016-04-12 07:21:35 | Re: Top features in 9.6? |