Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> Andres was working on a radix tree structure to fix this problem, but
> that seems to be abandoned now, and it seems a major undertaking. While
> I agree that the proposed solution is a wart, it seems much better than
> no solution at all. Can we consider Fujii's proposal as a temporary
> measure until we fix shared buffers? I'm +1 on it myself.
Once we've introduced a user-visible reloption it's going to be
practically impossible to get rid of it, so I'm -1. I'd much rather
see somebody put some effort into the radix-tree idea than introduce
a kluge that we'll be stuck with, and that doesn't even provide a
good user experience. Disabling vacuum truncation is *not* something
that I think we should recommend.
regards, tom lane
