On 27/08/14 10:27, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
So my proposal is a bit more complicated. First we introduce the notion
of a single number, to enable sorting and computations: the "delay
equivalent", which is the cost_limit divided by cost_delay.
Here's a patch that implements this idea. As you see this is quite a
bit more complicated that Haribabu's proposal.
There are two holes in this:
1. if you ALTER DATABASE to change vacuum delay for a database, those
values are not considered in the global equiv delay. I don't think this
is very important and anyway we haven't considered this very much, so
it's okay if we don't handle it.
2. If you have a "fast worker" that's only slightly faster than regular
workers, it will become slower in some cases. This is explained in a
FIXME comment in the patch.
I don't really have any more time to invest in this, but I would like to
see it in 9.4. Mark, would you test this? Haribabu, how open are you
to fixing point (2) above?
Thanks Alvaro - I will take a look.
regards
Mark
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
