Re: large table vacuum issues

Ed L. wrote:
> On Friday 04 January 2008 6:21 pm, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>> On Jan 4, 2008 6:38 PM, Ed L. <pgsql@bluepolka.net> wrote:
>>> We need some advice on how to handle some large table
>>> autovacuum issues.  One of our 8.1.2
>> First of all, update your 8.1 install to 8.1.10.  Failing to
>> keep up with bug fixes is negligent.  who knows, you might be
>> getting bitten by a bug that was fixed between 8.1.2 and
>> 8.1.10
>
> Could be.  But like you said, who knows.  In some environments,
> downtime for upgrading costs money (and more), too, sometimes
> even enough to make it "negligent" to take downtime to keep up
> with bug fixes (and of course, the new bugs) which may or may
> not be a factor at hand.  While the time required to restart a
> DB may be neglible, there are often upstream/downstream
> dependencies that greatly expand the actual downtime for the
> customer.  How much would downtime need to cost before you
> thought it negligent to upgrade immediately?  It's a tradeoff,
> not well-supported by simple pronouncements, one the customer
> and provider are best qualified to make.

You make a valid argument above but you forget a couple of minor points.

How much money does it cost when your customer:

* gets sued for a breech of security because they couldn't afford a 30
minute downtime at 3am? (I assume 30 minutes only because you do need to
shutdown external services).

* looses all there data because of a corner case function they are
running that causes pages to become corrupt?

Just curious...

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake