On 05/05/14 15:22, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Here what I could understand is that sum of cost_limit for all
> autovacuum workers should never exceed the value of
> autovacuum_vacuum_cost_limit which seems to be always the
> case in current code but same is not true for proposed patch.
>
Right, but have a look at the 1st message in this thread - the current
behavior (and to a large extent the above condition) means that setting
cost limits per table does not work in any remotely intuitive way.
ITSM that the whole purpose of a per table setting in this context is to
override the behavior of auto vacuum throttling - and currently this
does not happen unless you get real brutal (i.e setting the cost delay
to zero in addition to setting cost limit...making the whole cost limit
a bit pointless).
regards
Mark