Re: Strange assertion using VACOPT_FREEZE in vacuum.c

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 5:41 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> That's cool if you want to add those assertions, but please make them
> separate statements each, like
>
> Assert(vacstmt->options & (VACOPT_FULL | VACOPT_FREEZE) || vacstmt->freeze_min_age == -1);
> Assert(vacstmt->options & (VACOPT_FULL | VACOPT_FREEZE) || vacstmt->freeze_table_age == -1);
> ...
>
> Besides being more readable, this will give you more useful output if
> the assertion fails.

It makes sense. When a manual VACUUM FREEZE without options specified
without parenthesis, VACOPT_FREEZE is not used in gram.y, so ISTM that
we should change them to that instead:
Assert((vacstmt->options & VACOPT_VACUUM) ||
vacstmt->multixact_freeze_table_age == -1);
At least this would check that an ANALYZE does not set those
parameters inappropriately...
--
Michael