Matthew T. O'Connor schrieb:
Tom Lane wrote:
"Andrew Hammond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hmmm... it seems to me that points new users towards not using
autovacuum, which doesn't seem like the best idea. I think it'd be
better to say that setting the naptime really high is a Bad Idea.

It seems like we should have an upper limit on the GUC variable that's
less than INT_MAX ;-).  Would an hour be sane?  10 minutes?

This is independent of the problem at hand, though, which is that we
probably want the launcher to notice postmaster death in less time
than autovacuum_naptime, for reasonable values of same.

Do we need a configurable autovacuum naptime at all? I know I put it in the original contrib autovacuum because I had no idea what knobs might be needed. I can't see a good reason to ever have a naptime longer than the default 60 seconds, but I suppose one might want a smaller naptime for a very active system?

A PostgreSQL database on my laptop for testing. It should use as little resources as possible while being idle. That would be a scenario for naptime greater than 60 seconds, wouldn't it?

Best Regards
Michael Paesold

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Reply via email to