Re: Option to not use ringbuffer in VACUUM, using it in failsafe mode - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Masahiko Sawada
Subject Re: Option to not use ringbuffer in VACUUM, using it in failsafe mode
Date
Msg-id CAD21AoCBSqmqOKVH4Q256DeCC_UE50gu1sgixcjLFZGLEbABVA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Option to not use ringbuffer in VACUUM, using it in failsafe mode  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Option to not use ringbuffer in VACUUM, using it in failsafe mode
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 9:09 AM David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 at 12:59, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
> > These are all valid points. I've attached a patch aiming to address
> > each of them.
>
> I tweaked this a little further and pushed it.
>

I realized that the value of vacuum_buffer_usage_limit parameter in
postgresql.conf.sample doesn't have the unit:

#vacuum_buffer_usage_limit = 256 # size of vacuum and analyze buffer
access strategy ring.
                                 # 0 to disable vacuum buffer access strategy
                                 # range 128kB to 16GB

It works but I think we might want to add the unit kB for
understandability and consistency with other GUC_UNIT_KB parameters.
I've attached a small patch that adds the unit and aligns the indent
of the comments to the perimeter parameters.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Richard Guo
Date:
Subject: Re: [pg_rewind] use the passing callback instead of global function
Next
From: Daniel Gustafsson
Date:
Subject: Re: [pg_rewind] use the passing callback instead of global function