Tory M Blue <tmblue at gmail.com> writes:
> So I've noticed recently that I'm vacuuming the sl_?.log files with
> postgres and this doesn't appear right. The fact is slon has it's own
> process for dealing with this and I believe it's a clean truncate.

I would actually counsel taking the opposite approach, that it may be
preferable for autovacuum to handle vacuuming the Slony-I tables than
for Slony-I to do it itself.

Autovacuum should have a better capability to cope with the dual factors
of:
 a) Needing to vacuum some tables "even more often", as well as
 b) Needing to not vacuum some tables very often.

In principle, we could make the cleanup thread in Slony-I smarter, but
that would duplicate the good work that has gone into the PostgreSQL
built-in...
-- 
select 'cbbrowne' || '@' || 'ca.afilias.info';
<http://dba2.int.libertyrms.com/>
Christopher Browne
(416) 673-4124 (land)
"Bother,"  said Pooh,  "Eeyore, ready  two photon  torpedoes  and lock
phasers on the Heffalump, Piglet, meet me in transporter room three"