Re: Status of autovacuum and the sporadic stats failures ?

Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> Setting the cost_delay sounds a reasonable thing to do anyway, and in
> fact I already proposed it and nobody objected (AFAIR).  Now we only
> have to agree on a reasonable value.

Also note this message:

Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 21:51:40 -0500
Message-ID: <27665.1169952700@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Stats collector frozen? 

[...]
> If this theory is correct, then we can improve the reliability of the
> stats test a good deal if we put a sleep() at the *start* of the test,
> to let any old backends get out of the way.  It seems worth a try
> anyway.  I'll add this to HEAD and if the stats failure noise seems to
> go down, we can back-port it.

which was followed by this commit

revision 1.6
date: 2007-01-28 00:02:31 -0300;  author: tgl;  state: Exp;  lines: +4 -0;
Add a delay at the start of the stats test, to let any prior stats
activity quiesce.  Possibly this will fix the large increase in
non-reproducible stats test failures we've noted since turning on
stats_row_level by default.


Apparently it wasn't enough to completely eliminate the problems.  Did
it reduce them?  I haven't been watching the buildfarm closely enough to
know for sure.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support