On 2022-11-23 We 18:54, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 02:56:28PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> I have committed the first couple of these to get them out of the way. > Thanks! > >> But I think we need a bit of cleanup in the next patch. >> vacuum_is_relation_owner() looks like it's now rather misnamed. Maybe >> vacuum_is_permitted_for_relation()? Also I think we need a more thorough >> reworking of the comments around line 566. And I think we need a more >> detailed explanation of why the change in vacuum_rel is ok, and if it is >> OK we should adjust the head comment on the function. >> >> In any case I think this comment would be better English with "might" >> instead of "may": >> >> /* user may have the ANALYZE privilege */ > I've attempted to address all your feedback in v13. Please let me know if > anything needs further reworking.
Thanks, pushed. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com