[ 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