Neil Conway wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-14-05 at 16:22 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I agree with Tom.  I don't think the current behavior is a major issue
> > for users for it to be mentioned more than it already is
> Are you really suggesting that we shouldn't modify config.sgml to note
> that "autovacuum = off" does not actually imply that "the autovacuum
> daemon is disabled"? ISTM that plainly violates the principle of least
> surprise -- it is almost the definition of what an entry in config.sgml
> *should* include.

I agree, the note should be added there (but it should be a short one
and refer the reader someplace else for more complete details).

Was there a doc patch proposed already?  I seem to have missed it.

Alvaro Herrera                      
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?


Reply via email to