Gregory Stark wrote: > "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > We've had that hack in there for almost a month now, and no strange > > behaviors have turned up in the buildfarm. So I'm inclined to think > > it has served its purpose, and we should revert it before anyone else > > comes to bogus conclusions about performance. This is particularly > > the case since Andrew has worked up a pg_regress enhancement that would > > let specific buildfarm animals still test the "off" setting if they > > chose. > > I thought the idea was more to have people playing the home game to test it > out. They're much more likely to do something unexpected than the build farm. > Especially when it comes to vacuum and vacuum full and cluster and so on given > that autovacuum barely has a chance to start looking at things before the > regression tests are done.
Maybe we should lower the autovac naptime too, just to make it do some more stuff (and to see if it breaks something else just because of being running). -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/CTMLCN8V17R4 You liked Linux a lot when he was just the gawky kid from down the block mowing your lawn or shoveling the snow. But now that he wants to date your daughter, you're not so sure he measures up. (Larry Greenemeier) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster