Re: autovacuum scheduling starvation and frenzy

On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I didn't add this patch to the commitfest, because it was just a point
>> for discussion and not actually proposed for application. But It
>> doesn't seem to have provoked much discussion either.
>
>> Should I go add this to the next commitfest?
>
>> I do see it listed as a resolved item in
>> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.4_Open_Items
>
>> But I can't find a commit that would resolve it, so does that mean the
>> resolution was that the behavior was not new in 9.4 and so didn't need
>> to be fixed for it?
>
> It looks to me like Robert added that item to the "open items" page,
> but he put it at the bottom --- ie in the "already resolved items"
> list:
>
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/index.php?title=PostgreSQL_9.4_Open_Items&diff=22417&oldid=22380
>
> Probably this was a mistake and it should have gone into the still-to-do
> list.

Yeah. Oops.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company