> Why not keep it simple with
>
> "If a table has any indexes, this will happen at least once per vacuum,
>
> after the heap has been completely scanned. It may happen multiple times per
>
> vacuum if maintenance_work_mem (or, in the case of autovacuum,
>
> autovacuum_work_mem) is
On Mon, 2021-09-20 at 08:07 +, nikolai.berkoff wrote:
> I can see in
> src/backend/access/heap/vacuumlazy.c
> that compute_max_dead_tuples uses autovacuum_work_mem when it is given.
>
> The "vacuuming indexes" documentation has:
>
> > "If a table has any indexes, this will happen at least once
Hi,
There was no follow up to my message below so I'm raising it again.
I can see in
src/backend/access/heap/vacuumlazy.c
that compute_max_dead_tuples uses autovacuum_work_mem when it is given.
> The "vacuuming indexes" documentation has:
>
> "If a table has any indexes, this will happen
On Sunday, September 19, 2021, Anthony Berglas wrote:
>
> I note that nothing has happened.
>
> In future I would suggest that you simply tell people that document
> updates are not really welcome. Otherwise you waste people's time.
>
That isn’t generally true, and as I am not an Oracle my
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 8:04 AM PG Doc comments form
wrote:
> For all this documentation, it is completely unclear how to handle the most
> common, simple case. I.e.
>
> Select balance into :bal ...where key =123;
> Update set balance = :bal+100 where key = 100
I don't think that that's the
