On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > I guess that is the patch I proposed. However I think that there still > is room for discussion because the patch cannot skip to cleanup vacuum > when aggressive vacuum, which is one of the situation that I really > wanted to skip.
Well, I think there are outstanding concerns that the patch in question is not safe, and I don't see that anything has been done to resolve them. -- 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
