On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 11:45 AM Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie> wrote: > My thinking on vacuum_freeze_min_age has shifted very slightly. I now > think that I'll probably need to keep it around, just so things like > VACUUM FREEZE (which sets vacuum_freeze_min_age to 0 internally) > continue to work. So maybe its default should be changed to -1, which > is interpreted as "whatever autovacuum_freeze_max_age/2 is". But it > should still be greatly deemphasized in user docs.
I like that better, because it lets us retain an escape valve in case we should need it. I suggest that the documentation should say things like "The default is believed to be suitable for most use cases" or "We are not aware of a reason to change the default" rather than something like "There is almost certainly no good reason to change this" or "What kind of idiot are you, anyway?" :-) -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
