On Sat, 25 Oct 2025 at 10:14, Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 3:35 PM David Rowley <[email protected]> wrote: > > If we had the varying sleep time as I mentioned above, the > > failsafe code could even be removed as the > > "autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay / <tables score>" calculation would > > effectively zero the sleep time with any table > failsafe age. > > I'm not sure what you mean by "the failsafe could be removed". > Importantly, the failsafe will abandon all further index vacuuming. > That's why it's presented as something that you as a user are not > supposed to rely on.
I didn't realise it did that too. I thought it just dropped the delay to zero. In that case, I revoke the statement. David
