Re: bug in vacuumlo?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: Irina Sourikova <irina(at)bnl(dot)gov>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: bug in vacuumlo?
Date: 2003-09-24 05:39:18
Message-ID: 28500.1064381958@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> Do we need a 'AND NOT a.attisdropped' in there anywhere as well?

Hm, probably a good idea, although in the current state of the code
it theoretically shouldn't matter. (DROP COLUMN zeroes atttypid,
so that part of the join won't succeed. But vacuumlo shouldn't depend
on it.) I've applied a patch.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2003-09-24 06:21:08 correct NUL vs. NULL usage
Previous Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2003-09-24 02:34:56 Re: bug in vacuumlo?