Jeff Janes escribió:
> Is this functionality something we want? If so should it include explicit
> vacuum as well as autovac?
Yes. No.
> Any opinion about where in the code base it
> properly belongs (which obviously depends on whether it should cover manual
> vacuum as well)? And does the string need to distinguish between an
> autovac and an autoanalyze?
autovacuum_do_vac_analyze() is probably the place to add it. I think we
should include the wraparound, dovacuum and doanalyze flags in there
somehow, yes.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
