From: | Erwin Brandstetter <brsaweda(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Contradicting information on the "vacuum threshold" |
Date: | 2017-08-11 21:54:50 |
Message-ID: | CAGHENJ53HMDAWn64g9hDW5Rg-UtFvExu4VoDhjYKS-CSCmOSTw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On the one hand the manual for autovacuum_analyze_threshold claims here:
> Specifies the minimum number of inserted, updated or deleted tuples
needed to trigger an ANALYZE in any one table.
Similar in pg_settings.short_desc:
> Minimum number of tuple inserts, updates, or deletes prior to analyze.
"Minimum" indicates "row_count >= vacuum threshold". (Well "prior" makes
that less clear ..)
On the other hand the manual explains here:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/routine-vacuuming.html#AUTOVACUUM
> Otherwise, if the number of tuples obsoleted since the last VACUUM
exceeds the "vacuum threshold", the table is vacuumed.
"Exceeds" indicates "row_count > vacuum threshold".
Actual test results seem to support "row_count > vacuum threshold". See
test case here:
I suggest to either clarify the manual or change the code to actually use
>= instead of > ... and update the explanation for autovacuum accordingly.
Same for autovacuum_vacuum_threshold.
Regards
Erwin Brandstetter
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John Ekins | 2017-08-12 21:47:00 | Re: The reference to 'atacontrol' on FreeBSD is outdated. |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-08-11 20:43:34 | Re: Improve docuemntation for cidr/inet |