Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 11:03:36 -0400
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
 Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>,
 Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,
 Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>,
 "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Per table autovacuum vacuum cost limit behaviour
 strange
Message-ID: <20141002150336.GO28859@tamriel.snowman.net>
References: 
 <CAJrrPGeEwsezwA6+DpA2Y7MBJmEnNWwD5Gi4Ve_EqCxHoyHj3Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1LwFs9iM-rUdfOrZE5MvjSxMM9ZbPbzv1SeWgGYu-O=VQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <53672F63.3080400@catalyst.net.nz>
 <CAA4eK1KDAUP=g59ku_0ekDoRjaGfEamyadQn5rJVt3j5oErLXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <53686F22.8030300@catalyst.net.nz>
 <20140826161911.GE6343@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org>
 <CA+Tgmoav37msTP0pVsrEYz4LBYU6SETMZGYTgPo5AEOC0yCMbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140930221644.GR5311@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org>
 <20141002135412.GX5311@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org>
 <CA+TgmobQokthgWmv1C9vjvpz=K9koovy6O+nWZ9rV8gwC8ioRw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="HFD/Dq8JdnjNvyuv"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+TgmobQokthgWmv1C9vjvpz=K9koovy6O+nWZ9rV8gwC8ioRw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org


--HFD/Dq8JdnjNvyuv
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>=
 wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> So in essence what we're going to do is that the balance mechanism
> >> considers only tables that don't have per-table configuration options;
> >> for those that do, we will use the values configured there without any
> >> changes.
> >>
> >> I'll see about implementing this and making sure it finds its way to
> >> 9.4beta3.
> >
> > Here's a patch that makes it work as proposed.
> >
> > How do people feel about back-patching this?  On one hand it seems
> > there's a lot of fear of changing autovacuum behavior in back branches,
> > because for many production systems it has carefully been tuned; on the
> > other hand, it seems hard to believe that anyone has tuned the system to
> > work sanely given how insanely per-table options behave in the current
> > code.
>=20
> I agree with both of those arguments.  I have run into very few
> customers who have used the autovacuum settings to customize behavior
> for particular tables, and anyone who hasn't should see no change
> (right?), so my guess is that the practical impact of the change will
> be pretty limited.  On the other hand, it's a clear behavior change.
> Someone could have set the per-table limit to something enormous and
> never suffered from that setting because it has basically no effect as
> things stand right now today; and that person might get an unpleasant
> surprise when they update.
>=20
> I would at least back-patch it to 9.4.  I could go either way on
> whether to back-patch into older branches.  I lean mildly in favor of
> it at the moment, but with considerable trepidation.

I'm fine with putting it into 9.4.  I'm not sure that I see the value in
changing the back-branches and then having to deal with the "well, if
you're on 9.3.5 then X, but if you're on 9.3.6 then Y" or having to
figure out how to deal with the documentation for this.

Has there been any thought as to what pg_upgrade should do..?

	Thanks,

		Stephen

--HFD/Dq8JdnjNvyuv
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=igEV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--HFD/Dq8JdnjNvyuv--