Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > It seems to me there's no fundamental reason why there couldn't be
> > two VACUUMs running concurrently in a database. With the locking
> > we are doing now, it should be safe enough. So, I'd like to propose
> > that we get rid of the pg_vlock lock file. It doesn't have any useful
> > purpose but it does force manual intervention by the dbadmin to recover
> > if a VACUUM crashes :-(
> >
> > Comments? Did I miss something about why we can't have more than one
> > vacuum process?
>
> I vote for removal. Lock files are hacks, usually.
Agreed.
Vadim
