On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 02:56:28PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I have committed the first couple of these to get them out of the way.
Thanks!
> But I think we need a bit of cleanup in the next patch.
> vacuum_is_relation_owner() looks like it's now rather misnamed. Maybe
> vacuum_is_permitted_for_relation()? Also I think we need a more thorough
> reworking of the comments around line 566. And I think we need a more
> detailed explanation of why the change in vacuum_rel is ok, and if it is
> OK we should adjust the head comment on the function.
>
> In any case I think this comment would be better English with "might"
> instead of "may":
>
> /* user may have the ANALYZE privilege */
I've attempted to address all your feedback in v13. Please let me know if
anything needs further reworking.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
