Re: [BUGS] BUG #3326: Invalid lower bound of autovacuum_cost_limit
| От | Matthew T. O'Connor |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [BUGS] BUG #3326: Invalid lower bound of autovacuum_cost_limit |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 46683BD8.9080707@zeut.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [BUGS] BUG #3326: Invalid lower bound of autovacuum_cost_limit (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #3326: Invalid lower bound of autovacuum_cost_limit
|
| Список | pgsql-patches |
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: >>> But this is misleading (started postmaster with good value, then edited >>> postgresql.conf and entered "-2"): >>> 17903 LOG: received SIGHUP, reloading configuration files >>> 17903 LOG: -2 is outside the valid range for parameter "autovacuum_vacuum_cost_limit" (-1 .. 1000) >>> Note how it still says the range is -1 .. 1000. >> Can we redefine things to make zero be the "disabled" value, thus >> keeping the range of valid values contiguous? > > That would be another solution ... though it would be different from the > valid value for autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay (on which 0 is a valid > value). Also it would be a different value from previous versions. > > I don't think either of these is a showstopper, so let's go for that if > nobody objects. Can you make 0 and -1 both valid disabled values? That way it will be compatible with previous releases.
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: