public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>
To: Sami Imseih <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: David Rowley <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Treat <[email protected]>
Cc: Jeremy Schneider <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2026 10:53:23 -0500
Message-ID: <abGP87A3JPIXDG2I@nathan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA5RZ0vfhAnFBp4HrBQc+ALaJMx6vCvMtnBi39ST_4nH9PZEjA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+TgmoZE=-Pw=85u+eX6UpMdY02o1otEhQba0n2T78yVyV2N9g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAA5RZ0vzu4vfRP0podGDCBOn-OaK9Qs-oyksER5OtzanacqMQw@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+TgmoZ44jzFBB4zxoXrX6iMxv7TPzv5duPe44UPpoyBBDL48g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAApHDvo97hqpZR+vgVVSLQsPhVCA=yEerAGn9wzB_67vjmu6cA@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+TgmoaAgv5D6u+_4KKqQFGH1n+jsFZ1mFWh+CSGqDUtyBNsXg@mail.gmail.com>
<aam3dmZcia95-vB6@nathan>
<abAzhNqs5F8sJDdm@nathan>
<abBEiOICOdbbhsEI@nathan>
<CAA5RZ0seLxDmH9UftUA3vS8DrW+7T9HV5XK8yAuQxA8BaRkg2g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAA5RZ0vfhAnFBp4HrBQc+ALaJMx6vCvMtnBi39ST_4nH9PZEjA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 08:08:26PM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote:
>> + Oid xid_age;
>> + Oid mxid_age;
>>
>> Is using Oid here intentional? I'm curious why not use uint32 for clarity?
Fixed.
>> The new GUC docs says "...component of the score...", but without
>> introducing the concept of the prioritization score.
>> I think we should expand a bit more on this topic to help a user
>> understand and tune these more effectively. Attached is my
>> proposal for the docs. I tried to keep it informative without
>> being too verbose, and avoided making specific recommendations.
Good idea. I put my own spin on it in the attached. Please let me know
what you think.
> The current scaling calculation for force_vacuum could lead to
> exorbitantly high scores.
> Using DEBUG3 and consume_xids_until(2000000000), notice how the score goes
> from 7.93 to 661828682916018.125 once past failsafe age.
>
> [...]
>
> Do you think it will be better to just to add the age to the
> score?
I mean, that's kind of the point. Once a table surpasses one of the
failsafe thresholds, we want its score to be so exorbitantly high that
autovacuum is all but guaranteed to process it first. I see no particular
advantage to tempering the score in that case.
--
nathan
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], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: another autovacuum scheduling thread
In-Reply-To: <abGP87A3JPIXDG2I@nathan>
* 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