Re: Background vacuum

Greg Smith wrote:
>
> Count me on the side that agrees adjusting the vacuuming parameters is
> the more straightforward way to cope with this problem.


Agreed for vacuum; but it still seems interesting to me that
across databases and workloads high priority transactions
tended to get through faster than low priority ones.  Is there
any reason to believe that the drawbacks of priority inversion
outweigh the benefits of setting priorities?