Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Laurenz Albe
Тема Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age?
Дата
Msg-id f8b69c30afd245475c70d2c629f0eb0860e997b6.camel@cybertec.at
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age?  ("Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>)
Ответы Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 2023-04-13 at 12:16 -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> On 4/13/23 11:32 AM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> > On 4/12/23 11:34 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 11:50 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
>
> > > +1 to do one of the above. I think there is a good chance that
> > > somebody might be doing more harm by using it so removing this
> > > shouldn't be a problem. Personally, I have not heard of people using
> > > it but OTOH it is difficult to predict so giving some time is also not
> > > a bad idea.
> > >
> > > Do others have any opinion/suggestion on this matter?
> >
> > I need a bit more time to study this before formulating an opinion on
> > whether we should remove it for v16. In any case, I'm not against
> > documentation.
>
> [RMT hat]
>
> +1 for removing.

I am not against this in principle, but I know that there are people using
this parameter; see the discussion linked in

https://postgr.es/m/E1jkzxE-0006Dw-Dg@gemulon.postgresql.org

I can't say if they have a good use case for that parameter or not.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Daniel Gustafsson
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: User functions for building SCRAM secrets
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: User functions for building SCRAM secrets