On 15 April 2015 at 09:10, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2015-04-15 08:42:33 -0400, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> > Because it makes it subsequent accesses to the page cheaper.
>>
>> Cheaper for whom?
>
> Everyone.
I think what you mean is "Everyone else". It is demonstrably quicker
and more consistent for a process when it limits the amount of pruning
it does, as well as the fact that it causes additional WAL traffic
when it does so, causing replication lag.
I love it when someone cleans up for me. I just don't think they'll
accept the argument that they should clean up for me because it makes
their life easier. Certainly doesn't work with my kids.
> I don't really see the downside to this suggestion.
The suggestion makes things better than they are now but is still less
than I have proposed.
If what you both mean is "IMHO this is an acceptable compromise", I
can accept it also, at this point in the CF.
-- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, RemoteDBA, Training &
Services