public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Jeremy Schneider <[email protected]>
To: David Rowley <[email protected]>
Cc: Sami Imseih <[email protected]>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2025 18:47:40 -0700
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <aOaAuXREwnPZVISO@nathan>
	<CAA5RZ0ucgx6VgVCUYryZY33StMtHSpoND_7wEFjGCVCSjouUsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAApHDvo3maZsrZVq=Bur=Z6Gtse4asSEgHU0HzBhhcTfM-AfeA@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAApHDvpMEs3rewULyJZ=huT8ZM1C1PboV-G7K7jfGtJSgdx-fA@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>

On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 18:25:20 -0700
Jeremy Schneider <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 14:03:34 +1300
> David Rowley <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > I thought if we're to have a priority queue that it would be hard to
> > argue against sorting by how far over the given auto-vacuum
> > threshold that the table is.  If you assume that a table that just
> > meets the dead rows required to trigger autovacuum based on the
> > autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor setting gets a priority of 1.0, but
> > another table that has n_mod_since_analyze twice over the
> > autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor gets priority 2.0.  Effectively,
> > prioritise by the percentage over the given threshold the table is.
> > That way users could still tune things when they weren't happy with
> > the priority given to a table by adjusting the corresponding
> > reloption.
> 
> If users are tuning this thing then I feel like we've already lost the
> battle :)

I replied too quickly. Re-reading your email, I think your proposing a
different algorithm, taking tuple counts into account. No tunables. Is
there a fully fleshed out version of the proposed alternative algorithm
somewhere? (one of the older threads?) I guess this is why its so hard
to get anything committed in this area...

-J

view thread (143+ 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], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread
  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