Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Grant <grant(at)conprojan(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> > Can you see a scenario where a programmer would forget to delete the
> > data from pg_largeobject and the database becoming very large filled
> > with orphaned large objects?
>
> Sure. My point wasn't that the functionality isn't needed, it's that
> I'm not sure vacuumlo does it well enough to be ready to promote to
> the status of mainstream code. It needs more review and testing before
> we can move it out of /contrib.
>
IIRC vacuumlo doesn't take the type lo(see contrib/lo) into
account. I'm suspicious if vacuumlo is reliable.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue