"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The main attractions of this idea are avoiding the corrupt-index issue and > not doing vacuuming work that's 99.99% sure to be useless.
It does seem strange to me to vacuum a table you're pretty sure is useless *and* quite likely corrupt. Could autovacuum emit log messages as soon as it sees such tables and start dropping them at some point later? -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
