Re: Subject: bool / vacuum full bug followup part 2

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yes, and yes, but don't hold your breath on the latter part --- that
>> TODO item has been around for awhile. And it's gotten harder now that
>> we have lazy VACUUM; that means we need to be able to condense indexes
>> concurrently with other index operations.

> Can you remind me why it is so hard to fix this. I do not expect lazy
> vacuum to handle index shrinking, but it should be possible with full
> vacuum.

If you make that restriction then it might be less painful to do. I
have not thought about doing it that way; I'm of the opinion that only
a solution that lets lazy vacuum do it will be a real solution.

regards, tom lane