On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > (Status update for Noah: I expect Masahiko Sawada will respond > quickly, but if not I'll give some kind of update by Monday COB > anyhow.)
I believe this open item is now closed, unless Andres has more comments or wishes to discuss any point further, with the exception that we still need to decide whether to add VACUUM (even_frozen_pages) or some variant of that. I have added a new open item for that issue and marked this one as resolved. My intended strategy as the presumptive owner of the new items is to do nothing unless more of a consensus emerges than we have presently. We do not seem to have clear agreement on whether to add the new option; whether to make it a GUC, a reloption, a VACUUM syntax option, or some combination of those things; and whether it should blow up the existing VM and rebuild it (as proposed by Sawada-san) or just force frozen pages to be scanned in the hope that something good will happen (as proposed by Andres). In the absence of consensus, doing nothing is a reasonable choice here. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
