From: | Nikita Malakhov <hukutoc(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alexander Pyhalov <a(dot)pyhalov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Inconsistency in vacuum behavior |
Date: | 2023-01-18 08:27:19 |
Message-ID: | CAN-LCVO+Eh_V=PbJXXnvh-z7ScvLsLbjtN_HyifE+Zhrm6QS5Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi hackers!
Alexander found a very good issue.
Please check the solution above. Any objections? It's a production case,
please review,
any thoughts and objections are welcome.
On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 8:15 PM Alexander Pyhalov <a(dot)pyhalov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
wrote:
> Nikita Malakhov писал 2023-01-16 20:12:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Currently there is no error in this case, so additional thrown error
> > would require a new test.
> > Besides, throwing an error here does not make sense - it is just a
> > check for a vacuum
> > permission, I think the right way is to just skip a relation that is
> > not suitable for vacuum.
> > Any thoughts or objections?
> >
>
> No objections for not throwing an error.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Alexander Pyhalov,
> Postgres Professional
>
--
Regards,
Nikita Malakhov
Postgres Professional
https://postgrespro.ru/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2023-01-18 08:34:16 | Re: Modify the document of Logical Replication configuration settings |
Previous Message | Laurenz Albe | 2023-01-18 08:27:02 | Re: minor bug |