On 20 April 2015 at 20:28, Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> But why should 1 SELECT or 20 SELECTs or 200 SELECTs have to do a job, > while the user waits, which is fundamentally VACUUM's duty to do in the > background? > Agreed. I don't see a % as giving us anything at all. The idea is that we want to turn an O(N) problem for one query into an O(1) task. > The use case I see for this is when there is a mixed workload. There is > one select which reads the entire table, and hundreds of thousands of > selects/updates/insert that don't, and of course vacuum comes along every > now and then and does it thing. Why should the one massive SELECT have > horrible performance just because it was run right before autovacuum would > have kicked in instead of right after if finished? > +1 -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ <http://www.2ndquadrant.com/> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
