"Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
> There's no command other than VACUUM which continues to
> access table/index after *commit*. We couldn't process
> significant procedures in such an already commiitted state,
> could we ?
Why not? The intermediate state *is valid*. We just haven't
removed no-longer-referenced index and TOAST entries yet.
> What's wrong with vacuuming master and the toast table in
> separate transactions ?
You'd have to give up the lock on the master table if there were
a true commit. I don't want to do that ... especially not when
I don't believe there is a problem to fix.
regards, tom lane
