Re: [HACKERS] VACUUM delay (was Re: What's planned for 7.5?)

2004-01-20 Thread Jan Wieck
Josh Berkus wrote: People, I don't have the time to make enough different attempts to find the one that pleases all. My argument still is that all this IO throttling and IO optimizing is mainly needed for dedicated servers, because I think that if you still run multiple services on one box

Re: [HACKERS] VACUUM delay (was Re: What's planned for 7.5?)

2004-01-19 Thread Jan Wieck
Stephen wrote: The vacuum delay patch is not the ideal solution but it worked like a charm on my servers. I really need the vacuum delay patch or a better solution in 7.5. I'm getting millions of requests a month and running VACUUM without the patch makes PostgreSQL useless for many consecutive

Re: [HACKERS] VACUUM delay (was Re: What's planned for 7.5?)

2004-01-19 Thread Josh Berkus
People, I don't have the time to make enough different attempts to find the one that pleases all. My argument still is that all this IO throttling and IO optimizing is mainly needed for dedicated servers, because I think that if you still run multiple services on one box you're not really

Re: [HACKERS] VACUUM delay (was Re: What's planned for 7.5?)

2004-01-19 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor
On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 08:37, Jan Wieck wrote: but I will not waste my time with making patches nobody even gives a try. I downloaded and tested your patches. I just didn't get results get results that were put together well enough to present to the group. I hope this doesn't fall by the

Re: [HACKERS] VACUUM delay (was Re: What's planned for 7.5?)

2004-01-18 Thread Stephen
The vacuum delay patch is not the ideal solution but it worked like a charm on my servers. I really need the vacuum delay patch or a better solution in 7.5. I'm getting millions of requests a month and running VACUUM without the patch makes PostgreSQL useless for many consecutive hours. Not quite