On 10/18/2016 01:37 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
> On 2016-10-09 21:51:07 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Given that hot_standby_feedback is pretty bulletproof now, and a lot of
>> the work in reducing replay conflicts, I think the utility of
>> vacuum_defer_cleanup_age is at an end.  I really meant so submit a patch
>> to remove it to 9.6, but it got away from me.
> HS feedback doesn't e.g. work well with delayed and/or archived replay,
> whereas defer_cleanup does.

Oh, point!  See, that's why I polled, I knew there was something I was
forgetting about.

> On the other hand, removing it would make some of the reasoning around
> GetOldestXmin() a bit easier.

Enough to make it worth breaking the above?

Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to