On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> writes: >> Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> More generally, it was pointed out to me that users apparently do >>> updates of pg_autovacuum to change settings on a bunch of tables at >>> once. We might get some complaints if we remove that facility. > >> Hmm, argh. Maybe we do need the rule on a fake pg_autovacuum that >> Itagaki-san was proposing. > > AFAIR we pointed out from day one that pg_autovacuum was a temporary > API that we were not promising to keep around. Anybody who was coding > against it with the expectation that they'd not have to change that code > later was willfully ignoring the warning label. > >> There's a problem however; for pg_autovacuum you used to need to insert >> some -1 values on columns on which you wanted to keep as defaults. On >> the new code you need to skip the value altogether, and a -1 is rejected >> with an error. Not sure how would we translate that. > > Maybe use a real table with an ON INSERT trigger that could contain some > actual logic? But it'd probably still have to be custom-tailored to > whatever application code was inserting things into pg_autovacuum, > so it's not clear there's much point to writing that instead of fixing > the application.
In any case it's not difficult to write a script that loops over all of your tables with ALTER TABLE. It's probably not as fast as a single UPDATE statement, but I suspect you'd need to have an enormous number of tables for that to matter much. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
