public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
To: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age?
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2023 10:33:57 +0100
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 2023-Mar-17, Andres Freund wrote:
> I started writing a test for vacuum_defer_cleanup_age while working on the fix
> referenced above, but now I am wondering if said energy would be better spent
> removing vacuum_defer_cleanup_age alltogether.
+1 I agree it's not useful anymore.
> I don't think I have the cycles to push this through in the next weeks, but if
> we agree removing vacuum_defer_cleanup_age is a good idea, it seems like a
> good idea to mark it as deprecated in 16?
Hmm, for the time being, can we just "disable" it by disallowing to set
the GUC to a value different from 0? Then we can remove the code later
in the cycle at leisure.
--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"La gente vulgar sólo piensa en pasar el tiempo;
el que tiene talento, en aprovecharlo"
view thread (5+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age?
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox