Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> writes: > Jeff Davis wrote: >> On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 13:49 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >>> >>> I'm now leaning towards: >>> >>> autovacuum_freeze_max_age >>> vacuum_freeze_table_age >>> vacuum_freeze_min_age >>> >>> where autovacuum_freeze_max_age and vacuum_freeze_min_age are unchanged, and >>> vacuum_freeze_table_age is the new setting that controls when VACUUM or >>> autovacuum should perform a full scan of the table to advance relfrozenxid. >> >> I'm still bothered by the fact that "max" and "min" really mean the same >> thing here. > > Yeah. Those are existing names, though, and I don't recall any complaints from > users. > >> I don't think we can perfectly capture the meaning of these GUCs in the >> name. I think our goal should be to avoid confusion between them. > > Agreed.
I was thinking it would be clearer if the options which control *when* autovacuum fires off a worker consistently had some action word in them like "trigger" or "start" or "launch". -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
