Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Martin Pihlak escribió:
>> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> You missed putting back the BUG comment that used to be there about
>>> this.
>> This was deliberate, I did mention the condition in the comment at
>> the beginning of the file. This actually makes it a feature :)
>>
>> Seriously though, do you think that this is still a problem? Given
>> the rare occurrence of the revacuum and the fact that it is made
>> cheap by visibility map?
>
> Hmm, maybe it's no longer an issue with the visibility map, yes.
You still have to scan all indexes, so it's still not free by any means.
(I haven't been paying attention to what kind of a risk we're talking
about..)
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
