>>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 10:35 AM, in message <13267.1197563721@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes:
>> ... although to a naive user it's not clear what
>> is known at vacuum time that the INSERT into the empty table
>> couldn't have inferred.
>
> The fact that the INSERT actually committed.
Fair enough. I suppose that the possibility that of access before
the commit would preclude any optimization that would assume the
commit is more likely than a rollback, and do the extra work only in
the unusual case?
-Kevin
