On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 06:07:00PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Good point, but doesn't vacuum remove the need for pruning as it removes > > all the old rows? > > Sure. The point, I think, is to make autovacuum runs of some sort that > don't actually vacuum but only do HOT-pruning. Maybe this is a > reasonable solution to the problem that queries don't prune anymore > after Simon's patch. If we made autovac HOT-prune periodically, we > could have read-only queries prune only already-dirty pages. Of course, > that would need further adjustments to default number of autovac > workers, I/O allocation, etc.
Do we really want to make vacuum more complex for this? vacuum does have the delay settings we would need though. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
