On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 9:22 AM Joe Conway <m...@joeconway.com> wrote: > Although I don't think 500000 is necessarily too small. In my view, > having autovac run very quickly, even if more frequently, provides an > overall better user experience.
Can you elaborate on why you think that? I mean, to me, that's almost equivalent to removing autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor entirely, because only for very small tables will that calculation produce a value lower than 500k. We might need to try to figure out some test cases here. My intuition is that this is going to vacuum large tables insanely aggressively. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
