Alvaro Herrera wrote:

On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 02:09:47PM +1000, Neil Conway wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
One issue I do have to deal with right now is how many autovacuum
processes do we want to be running.  The current approach is to have one
autovacuum process.  Two possible options would be to have one per
database, and one per tablespace.  What do people think?
Why do we need more than one pg_autovacuum process?

The only reason I considered it is because you can use the regular
catalog-management routines to handle the new pg_autovacuum system
catalog.  With a single process, we need to issue SQL queries.  This is
very ugly IMHO.

It was always my intention to have VACUUM and ANALYZE update the new autovacuum system table, I just never got around to making that happen.

Personally I would vote for simplicty for now, that is only one autovacuum process and allow it to only issue one VACUUM command at any given time. Something more complicated sounds to me like a 2nd generation optimisation.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

              http://archives.postgresql.org

Reply via email to