On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 3:38 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> > wrote: >>> How about instead changing things so that we specifically reject >>> indexes? And maybe some kind of a check that will reject anything >>> that lacks a relfilnode? That seems like it would be more on point. >> >> I agree, I don't have strong opinion about this. >> It would be good to add condition for rejecting only indexes. >> Attached patches are, >> - Change heap2 rmgr description >> - Add condition to pg_visibility >> - Fix typo in pgvisibility.sgml >> (Sorry for the late notice..) > > OK, committed the first and last of those. I think the other one > needs some work yet; the error message doesn't seem like it is quite > our usual style, and if we're going to do something here we should > probably also insert a check to throw a better error when there is no > relfilenode. >
Thank you for your advising and suggestion! Attached latest 2 patches. * 000 patch : Incorporated the review comments and made rewriting logic more clearly. * 001 patch : Incorporated the documentation suggestions and updated logic a little. Please review them. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada
000_pgupgrade_rewrites_vm_v38.patch
Description: Binary data
001_optimize_vacuum_by_frozen_bit_v38.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
