| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(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 13:21:19 |
| Message-ID: | 200107311321.f6VDLJr07637@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > > > 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.
>
> This was my round about way of asking if something to combat this issue
> can be placed in the to do list. :)
Added to TODO:
* Improve vacuum of large objects (/contrib/vacuumlo)
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-07-31 13:23:12 | Re: Re: Returned mail: User unknown |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-07-31 13:18:57 | Re: Performance TODO items |