The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/11/runtime-config-autovacuum.html
Description:
The `autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay` setting changes to 2ms in PostgreSQL 12
but in the old Postgresql version, the default setting is still 20ms.
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 10:26:27AM +, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/11/runtime-config-autovacuum.html
> Description:
>
> The `autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay` setting changes to 2ms in P
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 05:40:14PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 10:26:27AM +, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
> >
> > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/11/runtime-config-autovacuum.html
> > Descrip
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 2:41 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 05:40:14PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 10:26:27AM +, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> > > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
> > >
> > > Page:
> https://www
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 03:38:16PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 2:41 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 05:40:14PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 10:26:27AM +, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> > > The following do
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 03:38:16PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
>> The proposal is to document in versions 9.4 to 11 that the recommended value
>> for the setting is 2ms while for reasons of continuity the default in these
>> versions is 20ms.
>> I don't really see any h
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 07:26:07PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 03:38:16PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> >> The proposal is to document in versions 9.4 to 11 that the recommended
> >> value
> >> for the setting is 2ms while for reasons of continui
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:30 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 07:26:07PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 03:38:16PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > >> The proposal is to document in versions 9.4 to 11 that the
> recommended valu
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> To be clear, because my cursory reading of the thread that was linked from
> the commit suggested that this specific situation was more "lets catch up
> to modern times", my position isn't that such documentation changes should
> be done as a rule, I am suggesting tha
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:59 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > To be clear, because my cursory reading of the thread that was linked
> from
> > the commit suggested that this specific situation was more "lets catch up
> > to modern times", my position isn't that such documenta
Thank you all for your fast response. I agree that back patching the
default change in general cases should be probably discussed in the hacker
mailing list to establish good practice. However, as a user, I would
typically just refer to the documentation of the specific version v11 in
this case ins
11 matches
Mail list logo
