Re: Parallel VACUUM in feature matrix on website

On 2015-09-28 10:22 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> 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?"

I totally agree with Josh.  Especially for newer or less-savvy users, this means
it just became easier to use Postgres in a performant way, and ease of use gets
customers. -- Darren Duncan