Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2016-05-18 18:25:39 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Yes, I've been wondering that too. VACUUM is not meant as a corruption >> checker, and should not be made into one, so what is the point of this >> flag exactly?
> Well, so far a VACUUM FREEZE (or just setting vacuum_freeze_table_age = > 0) verified the correctness of the visibility map; and that found a > number of bugs. Now visibilitymap grew additional responsibilities, > with a noticeable risk of data eating bugs, and there's no way to verify > whether visibilitymap's frozen bits are set correctly. Meh. I'm not sure we should grow a rather half-baked feature we'll never be able to remove as a substitute for a separate sanity checker. The latter is really the right place for this kind of thing. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers