Re: Autovacuum in the backend

Neil Conway wrote:

> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
>> One issue I do have to deal with right now is how many autovacuum
>> processes do we want to be running.  The current approach is to have one
>> autovacuum process.  Two possible options would be to have one per
>> database, and one per tablespace.  What do people think?
>
>
> Why do we need more than one pg_autovacuum process? (Note that this 
> need not necessarily imply only one concurrent VACUUM, as you can use 
> non-blocking connections in libpq.) 


Part of the backend integration work Alvaro is doing is teaching 
autovacuum to do it's work without libpq.