Re: Autovacuum loose ends
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Autovacuum loose ends |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87pstlw4xo.fsf@stark.xeocode.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Autovacuum loose ends (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > I was thinking GUC settings only; is there a real use-case for > table-specific delay parameters? ISTM the point of the delay parameters > for autovac is to put a lid on its impact on interactive response. Seen > in that light, you do not care exactly which table it's hitting at the > moment. I'm not sure that's true. ISTM if you have a small table that needs to be vacuumed frequently you probably don't want it taking longer than necessary to vacuum. It's probably mostly cached so there wouldn't be much of an i/o hit and even a small sleep can make a big proportional difference in vacuum run time. You could get into a situation where it takes longer to vacuum a bunch of such tables than the frequency you need the vacuuming to taking place. I think the i/o problem comes when you have large uncached tables. They probably have a relatively small percentage of the table being updated and so don't need to be vacuumed frequently. But when they do you need the sleeps to avoid the i/o problems. -- greg
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: