| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Why vacuum_freeze_table_age etc. doc in "Statement Behavior" section? |
| Date: | 2016-02-24 05:52:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTfEEED6gyK9z-qNEEirE39POU4zw9Aw1MuyS=2pMdC-A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> The explanations for vacuum_freeze_table_age etc. are in the section
> "Statement Behavior", which is a subsection of "Client Connection
> Defaults". To me vacuum_freeze_table_age etc. are totally unrelated
> to "Client Connection Defaults".
>
> I think "Resource Consumption" section is more appropriate for their
> place. There's already a section "Cost-based Vacuum Delay". Maybe we
> can add a new section for below under "Resource Consumption" something
> like "Managing Vacuum Freeze".
>
> vacuum_freeze_min_age
> vacuum_freeze_table_age
> vacuum_multixact_freeze_min_age
> vacuum_multixact_freeze_table_age
Those are parameters related controlling the way the query VACUUM
behaves, that's why they are placed where they are now, but so do the
cost-based parameters. So +1 for a new section under Resource
Consumption".
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-02-24 05:56:50 | Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-02-24 05:40:36 | Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby |