Re: Reviewing freeze map code

From: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
To: Victor Yegorov <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reviewing freeze map code
Date: 2016-05-18 14:09:51
Message-ID: 573C77AF.8030201@joeconway.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 05/18/2016 09:55 AM, Victor Yegorov wrote:
> 2016-05-18 16:45 GMT+03:00 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com
> <mailto:robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>>:
>
> No, that's what the existing FREEZE option does. This new option is
> about unnecessarily vacuuming pages that don't need it. The
> expectation is that vacuuming all-frozen pages will be a no-op.
>
>
> VACUUM (INCLUDING ALL) ?

VACUUM (FORCE ALL) ?

Joe

--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ildar Musin 2016-05-18 15:36:27 Re: Declarative partitioning
Previous Message Andreas Karlsson 2016-05-18 13:59:57 Improve BEGIN tab completion