On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
> I'm not convinced using a ring buffer is necessarily that bad even if
> you want to vacuum as fast as possible. The reason we use a small ring
> buffer is to avoid poisoning the entire cache with vacuum pages, not
> to throttle the speed of vacu
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 1:41 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is, but I definitely
>> agree there's a problem. There are definitely cases where people want
>> or indeed need to vacuum as fast as possibl
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is, but I definitely
> agree there's a problem. There are definitely cases where people want
> or indeed need to vacuum as fast as possible, and using a small ring
> buffer is not the way to do th
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 11:47 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> Reviving a very old thread, because I've run into the issue again.
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>>> If I invoke vacuum manually and do so with VacuumCostDelay ==
Reviving a very old thread, because I've run into the issue again.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> If I invoke vacuum manually and do so with VacuumCostDelay == 0, I
>> have basically declared my intentions to get this
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> If I invoke vacuum manually and do so with VacuumCostDelay == 0, I
> have basically declared my intentions to get this pain over with as
> fast as possible even if it might interfere with other processes.
>
> Under that condition, shouldn't it u
If I invoke vacuum manually and do so with VacuumCostDelay == 0, I
have basically declared my intentions to get this pain over with as
fast as possible even if it might interfere with other processes.
Under that condition, shouldn't it use BAS_BULKWRITE rather than
BAS_VACUUM? The smaller ring si
