Re: Missing mention of autovacuum_work_mem

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: "nikolai(dot)berkoff" <nikolai(dot)berkoff(at)pm(dot)me>, "pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Missing mention of autovacuum_work_mem
Date: 2021-09-20 13:09:36
Message-ID: b48ec99bfbb9eaf329fd9c3e7a20551810244882.camel@cybertec.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

On Mon, 2021-09-20 at 08:07 +0000, nikolai.berkoff wrote:
> I can see in
> src/backend/access/heap/vacuumlazy.c
> that compute_max_dead_tuples uses autovacuum_work_mem when it is given.
>
> The "vacuuming indexes" documentation has:
>
> > "If a table has any indexes, this will happen at least once per vacuum,
> > after the heap has been completely scanned. It may happen multiple times per
> > vacuum if maintenance_work_mem is insufficient to store the number of dead
> > tuples found."

Your suggested change is:

> "If a table has any indexes, this will happen at least once per vacuum,
> after the heap has been completely scanned. It may happen multiple times per
> vacuum if the memory is insufficient to store the number of dead
> tuples found. The memory is set via the maintenance_work_mem unless
> it is an autovacuum then autovacuum_work_mem will be used."

Why not keep it simple with

"If a table has any indexes, this will happen at least once per vacuum,
after the heap has been completely scanned. It may happen multiple times per
vacuum if maintenance_work_mem (or, in the case of autovacuum,
autovacuum_work_mem) is insufficient to store the number of dead
tuples found."

Yours,
Laurenz Albe
--
Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message nikolai.berkoff 2021-09-20 13:40:38 Re: Missing mention of autovacuum_work_mem
Previous Message nikolai.berkoff 2021-09-20 08:07:35 Re: Missing mention of autovacuum_work_mem