[ oh, I forgot to respond to this: ]

"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Isn't there a special lock acquired on a relation by vacuum? Can't we
> just check for that?

I think you're thinking that ConditionalLockRelation solves the problem,
but it does not, because it will fail if someone has taken a (quasi)
exclusive lock unrelated to vacuuming.  You don't want an application
that frequently takes short-term ExclusiveLocks on a table to thereby
cause autovacuum to frequently skip that table.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Reply via email to