[HACKERS] autovacuum default parameters (was Re: 8.2 is 30% better in pgbench than 8.3)

2007-07-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Gregory Stark wrote: Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am taking the liberty to also lower the vacuum and analyze threshold default values to 50, per previous discussion. Did we also reach any consensus about lowering the

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum default parameters (was Re: 8.2 is 30% better in pgbench than 8.3)

2007-07-23 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Gregory Stark wrote: Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am taking the liberty to also lower the vacuum and analyze threshold default values to 50, per previous discussion. Did we also reach any consensus about lowering

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum default parameters (was Re: 8.2 is 30% better in pgbench than 8.3)

2007-07-23 Thread ITAGAKI Takahiro
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We didn't, but while I agree with the idea, I think 5% is too low. I don't want autovacuum to get excessively aggressive. Is 10% not enough? I think the threshold should be a little less than PCTFREE of indexes, to avoid splitting of btree leaves. It