On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> I guess that is the patch I proposed. However I think that there still
> is room for discussion because the patch cannot skip to cleanup vacuum
> when aggressive vacuum, which is one of the situation that I really
> wanted to skip.
Well, I think there are outstanding concerns that the patch in
question is not safe, and I don't see that anything has been done to
resolve them.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
