Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age?
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20230318093357.g4e3eexqg6dxmuel@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age? (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age?
Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2023-Mar-17, Andres Freund wrote: > I started writing a test for vacuum_defer_cleanup_age while working on the fix > referenced above, but now I am wondering if said energy would be better spent > removing vacuum_defer_cleanup_age alltogether. +1 I agree it's not useful anymore. > I don't think I have the cycles to push this through in the next weeks, but if > we agree removing vacuum_defer_cleanup_age is a good idea, it seems like a > good idea to mark it as deprecated in 16? Hmm, for the time being, can we just "disable" it by disallowing to set the GUC to a value different from 0? Then we can remove the code later in the cycle at leisure. -- Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "La gente vulgar sólo piensa en pasar el tiempo; el que tiene talento, en aprovecharlo"
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: