DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
	b=uTxsqoaZ3HjhsW0cE7pMPXbW7ezpWNhEqcMImDJT7dlArEK/tZ70sjvGbaCnIIVzWbVpIUD4vsf0h263DDe+vAxQt11pj/aRoff2aUdaN7kbwhTAIVC6U+1x3SAXmulRjQfc1ixlFx0BQi5eYbgqyiNkhb6YSylErxernINT4gw=
Message-ID: <36e682920711301453x2d361iff5d3f8679606d3e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 17:53:01 -0500
From: "Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com>
To: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Subject: Re: Enhancement request
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "Campbell, Lance" <lance@uiuc.edu>,
	"posgres support" <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <20071130140005.18521c54@jd-laptop>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <B10E6810AC2A2F4EA7550D072CDE8760197E2C@SAB-FENWICK.sab.uiuc.edu>
	<36e682920711301218m703b3c67s6f547fd7b9b60e7c@mail.gmail.com>
	<7099.1196458205@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<36e682920711301332q1cce5db9qe44fb068fcd5608d@mail.gmail.com>
	<7341.1196459304@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20071130140005.18521c54@jd-laptop>

On Nov 30, 2007 5:00 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> > So: show me a use case for this that will still make sense in a
> > mostly-autovacuum world.
>
> I think you are living in a different world than I am if you think it
> is a mostly-autovacuum world.

Same here.

> Yes autovacuum is great for general low use scenarios. Throw it at a
> database doing hundreds of thousands (or even millions) of transactions
> an hour that has relations that in the multiple hundred gig range and
> autovacuum is useless for a good portion of that database.

Yes, this is precisely the case I'm talking about.  Every single
high-volume client we have or have consulted for is using custom
vacuuming.  Autovacuum works fine for the common case, but it doesn't
handle high-volume databases very well yet.

> The thing is, it isn't nearly as special case for my environments. I
> have many customers, with many tables where autovacuum just doesn't cut
> it. We turn it on for say 80% of the relations but guess what... the
> important relations are still on some type of schedule through
> something like cron.
>
> I get your argument but surely adding SCHEMA isn't that much of a code
> bloat scenario. We don't even have to add another reserved word...

Agreed.  It's very simple and won't add much code at all.

-- 
Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324
EnterpriseDB Corporation                | fax: 732.331.1301
499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor          | jonah.harris@enterprisedb.com
Edison, NJ 08837                        | http://www.enterprisedb.com/