On 2014-10-15 15:02:43 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Btw, I have just put my hands on this code and made the attached to > make vac_update_relstats able to do a transactional update. It looks > to work fine with only a check on the flags of vacuum statement.
Have you tested that the problem's now fixed?
Yep. In the test case given by Casey the foreign key on the second table is visible after the rollback.
Imo this is complex enough to deserve a regression test. Can you add one?
Definitely makes sense. Here is an updated version.
