Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: vacuumlo.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Grant <grant(at)conprojan(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: vacuumlo.
Date: 2001-07-31 01:29:41
Message-ID: 3106.996542981@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Grant <grant(at)conprojan(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> Is it possible to get [vacuumlo] included in the main vacuumdb program for
> support to vacuum orphaned large objects?

Hmm.  I'm not convinced that vacuumlo is ready for prime time...
in particular, how safe is it in the presence of concurrent
transactions that might be adding or removing LOs?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

  • vacuumlo. at 2001-07-31 00:14:50 from Grant

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: GrantDate: 2001-07-31 01:52:10
Subject: Re: vacuumlo.
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-07-31 00:59:38
Subject: Re: Re: OpenUnix 8 Patchj

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group