Re: autovacuum_freeze_max_age on append-only tables

From: Senor <frio_cervesa(at)hotmail(dot)com>
To: "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: autovacuum_freeze_max_age on append-only tables
Date: 2022-04-22 23:30:54
Message-ID: DM8PR01MB7016C2C60B69B5BE1CAB3E8CF7F79@DM8PR01MB7016.prod.exchangelabs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Thanks David
> In any case the cost-based stuff throttles I/O only (per the docs at
> least) but even while sleeping it still holds its lock.  And it won't
> be kicked off of the lock by other processes.  I don't see where it is
> documented that the autovacuum cost settings are altered during the
> anti-wraparound vacuum so I presume it will still sleep by default.
>
I knew I was misunderstanding something. I had picked up the impression
that the vacuum process cost_delay released the lock for the period. Not
just do nothing. Seems like that would be worth mentioning in the Docs.
I'm learning this from the inside out in the tradition of "well someone
has to do it". I'm sure I'm not alone.

-Senor

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daria Lesyk 2022-04-23 15:15:56 Problems with installation on Mac OS
Previous Message andrew cooke 2022-04-22 16:59:29 Re: Logical subscription / publication lifetimes