Simon, is this patch ready to be added to the patch queue? I assume not. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simon Riggs wrote: > On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 09:14 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 16:21 +0900, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote: > > > > With the default > > > value of scan_recycle_buffers(=0), VACUUM seems to use all of buffers in > > > pool, > > > just like existing sequential scans. Is this intended? > > > > Yes, but its not very useful for testing to have done that. I'll do > > another version within the hour that sets N=0 (only) back to current > > behaviour for VACUUM. > > New test version enclosed, where scan_recycle_buffers = 0 doesn't change > existing VACUUM behaviour. > > -- > Simon Riggs > EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com > [ Attachment, skipping... ] > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
