Re: Parallel VACUUM in feature matrix on website

On 09/27/2015 12:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Also, I think "WAL Buffer auto-tuning" should be cut. It doesn't
> warrant inclusion here. There are one or two other items that should
> be pruned too, but less obviously so.
>

I disagree here; I think that anything which eliminates a need for
manual tuning is a significant feature.  Expecially if you're looking at
the chart and trying to remember "hey, do I need to tune checkpoint
segments on this version?"

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com