Re: Add pg_stat_autovacuum_priority

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Sami Imseih <samimseih@gmail.com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>, Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net>, satyanarlapuram@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2026-04-04T14:33:43Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Apr 04, 2026 at 08:25:26AM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote:
> "Scores greater than or equal to <literal>1.0</literal>" in the comments
> of each field are misleading. This conflates scoring with vacuum/analyze
> eligibility and it's possible with a autovacuum_*_weight < 1.0 to trigger an
> autovacuum/analyze.

Ah, that's unfortunate.  I think it'd be good to give folks some idea of
what autovacuum will actually process.  I wonder if we could adjust the
documentation accordingly.

-- 
nathan



Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Fix double-free in pg_stat_autovacuum_scores.

  2. Add LOG_NEVER error level code.

  3. Add pg_stat_autovacuum_scores system view.

  4. Remove recheck_relation_needs_vacanalyze().

  5. Add elevel parameter to relation_needs_vacanalyze().

  6. Teach relation_needs_vacanalyze() to always compute scores.

  7. Refactor relation_needs_vacanalyze().

  8. Add rudimentary table prioritization to autovacuum.

  9. Fix per-relation memory leakage in autovacuum.

  10. Fix recently-understood problems with handling of XID freezing, particularly