Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables

On 27 January 2013 17:11, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 4:17 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> On 25 January 2013 17:19, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> We
>>> could easily run across a system where pg_class order happens to be
>>> better than anything else we come up with.
>>
>> I think you should read that back to yourself and see if you still
>> feel the word "easily" applies here.
>
> I absolutely do.

> You will not convince me that whacking around the
> behavior of autovacuum in a maintenance release is a remotely sane
> thing to do.

This is a different argument. It would be better to say this than to
come up with implausible problems as a way of rejecting something.

-- Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services