| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamt(at)mwd(dot)biglobe(dot)ne(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: gistVacuumUpdate |
| Date: | 2012-01-18 15:05:57 |
| Message-ID: | 4F16DFD5.1000506@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 13.01.2012 06:24, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> hi,
>
> gistVacuumUpdate was removed when old-style VACUUM FULL was removed.
> i wonder why.
> it was not practical and REINDEX is preferred?
>
> anyway, the removal seems incomplete and there are some leftovers:
> F_TUPLES_DELETED
> F_DELETED
> XLOG_GIST_PAGE_DELETE
Hmm, in theory we might bring back support for deleting pages in the
future, I'm guessing F_DELETED and the WAL record type were left in
place because of that. Either that, or it was an oversight. It's also
good to have the F_DELETED/F_TUPLES_DELETED around, so that new versions
don't get confused if they see those set in GiST indexes that originate
from an old cluster, upgraded to new version with pg_upgrade. For that
purpose, a comment explaining what those used to be would've been
enough, though.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Mead | 2012-01-18 15:35:23 | Re: IDLE in transaction introspection |
| Previous Message | Kohei KaiGai | 2012-01-18 14:50:07 | Re: [v9.2] sepgsql's DROP Permission checks |