Re: Auto Vacuum Daemon (again...)

On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 08:42, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > > Not sure what you mean by that, but it sounds like the behaviour of my AVD 
> > > (having it block until the vacuum command completes) is fine, and perhaps 
> > > preferrable. 
> > 
> > I can easily imagine larger systems with multiple CPUs and multiple disk
> > and card bundles to support multiple databases.  In this case, I have a
> > hard time figuring out why you'd not want to allow multiple concurrent
> > vacuums.  I guess I can understand a recommendation of only allowing a
> > single vacuum, however, should it be mandated that AVD will ONLY be able
> > to perform a single vacuum at a time?
> 
> Hmm.. CPU time (from what I've seen) isn't an issue.  Strictly disk. The
> big problem with multiple vacuums is determining which tables are in
> common areas.
> 
> Perhaps a more appropriate rule would be 1 AVD per tablespace?  Since
> PostgreSQL only has a single tablespace at the moment....

But tablespace is planned for 7.4 right?  Since tablespace is supposed
to go in for 7.4, I think you've hit the nail on the head.  One AVD per
tablespace sounds just right to me.


-- 
Greg Copeland <greg@copelandconsulting.net>
Copeland Computer Consulting