Re: Vacuum Delay feature
От | Christopher Browne |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Vacuum Delay feature |
Дата | |
Msg-id | m33c9f6256.fsf@wolfe.cbbrowne.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Vacuum Delay feature (Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when pgman@candle.pha.pa.us (Bruce Momjian) would write: > I guess my question is that now that we have the new cache > replacement policy, is the vacuum delay worth while. I looked at > http://developer.postgresql.org/~wieck/vacuum_cost/ and does seem > useful. They satisfy quite separate use cases, so both are surely useful. - The new cache replacement policy allows us to make sure that cache isn't getting blown on worthless things. - Vacuum delay allows us to make sure that we aren't spending all our I/O on vacuuming. There is overlap between their uses, as both should help diminish the use of I/O to fill buffers with data that was discarded, but they surely have separate uses. -- "cbbrowne","@","acm.org" http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lisp.html You know that little indestructible black box that is used on planes---why can't they make the whole plane out of the same substance?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: