[HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/commands (command.c vacuum.c)

[Tom Lane]

"Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmm,is there any good reason to vacuum toast table in the 
> transaction which was already internally committed by vacuum
> of the master table ?  Is it possible under WAL ?

It had better be possible under WAL, because vacuuming indexes is
done in essentially the same way: we clean the indexes *after* we
commit the master's tuple movements.

Really, the TOAST table is being treated the same way we handle
indexes, and I think that's good.

                        regards, tom lane