From: Gaetano Mendola <mendola@bigfoot.com>
Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] pg_autovacuum is nice ... but ...
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 13:00:56 +0100
Organization: PYRENET Midi-pyrenees Provider
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <418B6B78.7040107@bigfoot.com>
References: <20041103155855.O82047@ganymede.hub.org>
	<41895BDA.1090903@postgresql.org>
	<20041103201625.S82047@ganymede.hub.org>
	<19430.1099533223@sss.pgh.pa.us> <418AA915.7010903@postgresql.org>
	<20041104182322.D21566@ganymede.hub.org>
	<6789.1099608272@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103)
In-Reply-To: <6789.1099608272@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org

Tom Lane wrote:
 > "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
 >
 >>Moved to -hackers where this belongs :)
 >
 >
 >>On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Justin Clift wrote:
 >>
 >>>Would making max_fsm_relations and max_fsm_pages dynamically update
 >>>themselves whilst PostgreSQL runs be useful?
 >
 >
 > Possibly, but it isn't happening in the foreseeable future, for the same
 > reason that we don't auto-update shared_buffers and the other shared
 > memory sizing parameters: we can't resize shared memory on the fly.

Right but we can create a new segment and use it too. I don't know how
these segments are used but I used to do it in the past, of course you have
to create a memory manager that handle not ccntinuous segments.
Of course this only if the effort to do it can justify the man power working
on it.


Regards
Gaetano Mendola