Re: Reviewing freeze map code

On 05/06/2016 01:40 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 8:08 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>> On 2016-05-02 14:48:18 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> 77a1d1e Department of second thoughts: remove PD_ALL_FROZEN.
>>
>> Nothing to say here.
>>
>>> fd31cd2 Don't vacuum all-frozen pages.
>>
>> Hm. I do wonder if it's going to bite us that we don't have a way to
>> actually force vacuuming of the whole table (besides manually rm'ing the
>> VM). I've more than once seen VACUUM used to try to do some integrity
>> checking of the database. How are we actually going to test that the
>> feature works correctly? They'd have to write checks ontop of
>> pg_visibility to see whether things are borked.
>
> Let's add VACUUM (FORCE) or something like that.

This is actually inverted. Vacuum by default should vacuum the entire
relation, however if we are going to keep the existing behavior of this
patch, VACUUM (FROZEN) seems to be better than (FORCE)?

Sincerely,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.