X-Original-To: pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B89009DC803; Tue, 7 Feb 2006 01:05:48 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 49770-03; Tue, 7 Feb 2006 01:05:47 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from noel.decibel.org (noel.decibel.org [67.100.216.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 292D69DC84B; Tue, 7 Feb 2006 01:05:46 -0400 (AST) Received: by noel.decibel.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id D373C39820; Tue, 7 Feb 2006 05:05:45 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 23:05:45 -0600 From: "Jim C. Nasby" To: "Matthew T. O'Connor" Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Default autovacuum settings too conservative Message-ID: <20060207050545.GZ1240@pervasive.com> References: <20060201211633.GM95850@pervasive.com> <43E12A03.6070906@zeut.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <43E12A03.6070906@zeut.net> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE amd64 X-Distributed: Join the Effort! http://www.distributed.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.104 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.104] X-Spam-Score: 0.104 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200602/64 X-Sequence-Number: 20485 On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 04:37:07PM -0500, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: > I think the default settings should be designed to minimize the impact > autovacuum has on the system while preventing the system from ever > getting wildly bloated (also protect xid wraparound, but that doesn't > have anything to do with the thresholds). I don't really see the logic behind that. Problems caused by inadequate vacuuming seem to be much more prevalent than problems caused by vacuum impacting the system. If vacuum impact is a concern I think it more reasonable to make the default vacuum_cost_delay non-zero instead. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461