Re: Should we remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age?

Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>

To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>, "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>

Date: 2023-04-14T12:33:44Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

Rework text in replication slots documentation
- 27d04ed5310a 17.0 landed
Remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age
- 1118cd37eb61 16.0 landed
Allow read only connections during recovery, known as Hot Standby.
- efc16ea52067 9.0.0 cited

> On 14 Apr 2023, at 14:30, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> ..as Peter rightly says, XID age is likely a poor proxy for
> whatever people really care about, so I don't think continuing to have
> a setting that works like that is a good plan.

Agreed, and removing it is likely to be a good vehicle for figuring out what we
should have instead (if anything).

--
Daniel Gustafsson