On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Yes, the existing assertion is right. My point is that it is strange
> that we do not check the values of freeze parameters for an ANALYZE
> query, which should be set to -1 all the time. If this is thought as
> not worth checking, I'll drop this patch and my concerns.
Perhaps this explains better what I got in mind, aka making the
assertion stricter:
Assert((vacstmt->options & VACOPT_VACUUM) ||
- !(vacstmt->options & (VACOPT_FULL | VACOPT_FREEZE)));
+ ((vacstmt->options & (VACOPT_FULL | VACOPT_FREEZE)) == 0 &&
+ vacstmt->freeze_min_age < 0 &&
+ vacstmt->freeze_table_age < 0 &&
+ vacstmt->multixact_freeze_min_age < 0 &&
+ vacstmt->multixact_freeze_table_age < 0));
Regards,
--
Michael
diff --git a/src/backend/commands/vacuum.c b/src/backend/commands/vacuum.c
index 2f3f79d..e1472ad 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/vacuum.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/vacuum.c
@@ -110,7 +110,11 @@ vacuum(VacuumStmt *vacstmt, Oid relid, bool do_toast,
/* sanity checks on options */
Assert(vacstmt->options & (VACOPT_VACUUM | VACOPT_ANALYZE));
Assert((vacstmt->options & VACOPT_VACUUM) ||
- !(vacstmt->options & (VACOPT_FULL | VACOPT_FREEZE)));
+ ((vacstmt->options & (VACOPT_FULL | VACOPT_FREEZE)) == 0 &&
+ vacstmt->freeze_min_age < 0 &&
+ vacstmt->freeze_table_age < 0 &&
+ vacstmt->multixact_freeze_min_age < 0 &&
+ vacstmt->multixact_freeze_table_age < 0));
Assert((vacstmt->options & VACOPT_ANALYZE) || vacstmt->va_cols == NIL);
stmttype = (vacstmt->options & VACOPT_VACUUM) ? "VACUUM" : "ANALYZE";
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
