Re: Missing mention of autovacuum_work_mem

2021-09-20 Thread nikolai.berkoff
> Why not keep it simple with > > "If a table has any indexes, this will happen at least once per vacuum, > > after the heap has been completely scanned. It may happen multiple times per > > vacuum if maintenance_work_mem (or, in the case of autovacuum, > > autovacuum_work_mem) is insuffici

Re: Missing mention of autovacuum_work_mem

2021-09-20 Thread Laurenz Albe
On Mon, 2021-09-20 at 08:07 +, nikolai.berkoff wrote: > I can see in > src/backend/access/heap/vacuumlazy.c > that compute_max_dead_tuples uses autovacuum_work_mem when it is given. > > The "vacuuming indexes" documentation has: > > > "If a table has any indexes, this will happen at least once

Re: Missing mention of autovacuum_work_mem

2021-09-20 Thread nikolai.berkoff
Hi, There was no follow up to my message below so I'm raising it again. I can see in src/backend/access/heap/vacuumlazy.c that compute_max_dead_tuples uses autovacuum_work_mem when it is given. > The "vacuuming indexes" documentation has: > > "If a table has any indexes, this will happen a