Re: Isn't it better with "autovacuum worker...." instead of "worker took too long to start; canceled" specific to "auto

From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Isn't it better with "autovacuum worker...." instead of "worker took too long to start; canceled" specific to "auto
Date: 2021-10-28 04:22:19
Message-ID: CAFiTN-sQ6h+VB_dKAqREdzCcW8YU2+5rzn8cgLQQw9WXOu4CPw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 8:14 AM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > LOG: level: 1; AV worker: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7928 free (0 chunks); 264 used
>
> Good catch. I've seen the use of "AV" in some of the mem context
> names, why that? Let's be specific and say "Autovacuum". Attached
> patch does that. Please review it.

+1, the error message and other improvements look good.

--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amul Sul 2021-10-28 04:24:42 Re: inefficient loop in StandbyReleaseLockList()
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2021-10-28 04:05:15 Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side