Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > On 12/5/11 1:36 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: >> I understand the impulse to run autovacuum less frequently or >> less aggressively. When we first started running PostgreSQL the >> default configuration was very cautious. > > The default settings are deliberately cautious, as default > settings should be. I was talking historically, about the defaults in 8.1: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/runtime-config-autovacuum.html Those defaults were *over*-cautious to the point that we experienced serious problems. My point was that many people's first instinct in that case is to make the setting less aggressive, as I initially did and the OP has done. The problem is actually solved by making them *more* aggressive. Current defaults are pretty close to what we found, through experimentation, worked well for us for most databases. > But yes, anyone with a really large/high-traffic database will > often want to make autovac more aggressive. I think we're in agreement: current defaults are good for a typical environment; high-end setups still need to tune to more aggressive settings. This is an area where incremental changes with monitoring works well. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
