Re: vacuumlo.

Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > > > 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)
>

Is it possible for vacuumlo to be moved out of /contrib ?
As far as I see, there's no perfect solution for vacuumlo.

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue