Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
> That seems a big jump.  BTW, I know .08 and .04 were suggested, but I
> didn't see confirmation that it was a good idea.  I know my initial
> values were grossly over-conservative, but I am concerned about
> bogging down the server with lots of vacuums, especially since we
> don't have the delay settings on by default, nor do we have a
> maintenance windows yet.

OK, it seems that while everyone wants autovacuum be more aggressive by 
default, no one has any good data to support one setting or another.  I 
so I suggest that we just cut scale factor and base threshold in half 
right now (so it'd be 0.2, 0.1, 500, 250) and see about a 
better-researched setting for the next release.

Peter Eisentraut

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to