"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just curious, but isn't this one of the key points about pg_autovacuum in
> the first place? So that you vacuum what needs to be vacuum'd, and not
> *everything* ... ? Shouldn't the answer to the 'bandwidth issue' change
> to 'you should install/use pg_autovacuum'?
No, not really, but I think it's much more likely that you'd want to
enable vacuum delay for autovacuum-commanded vacuums than vacuums
commanded interactively. Or, if you still prefer the old-tech way of
performing routine vacuums from a cron script, you'd probably turn on
vacuum delay in that cron script.
I think we *should* add to autovacuum a parameter to let it set
vacuum_delay for its vacuums, and maybe even default to having it on.
But I'm unconvinced we want any delay as the global default.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
