On 2020-03-25 11:05:21 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Since we talked about how scale_factor can be used to effectively disable this
> new feature, I thought that scale=100 was too small and suggesed 1e10 (same as
> max for vacuum_cleanup_index_scale_factor since 4d54543ef).  That should allow
> handling the case that analyze is disabled, or its threshold is high, or it
> hasn't run yet, or it's running but hasn't finished, or analyze is triggered 
> as
> same time as vacuum.

For disabling we instead should allow -1, and disable the feature if set
to < 0.


Andres Freund

Reply via email to