Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We discussed an optimization of VACUUM here
> that would allow VACUUM to complete faster by avoiding scanning the
> indexes when no rows were removed from the heap by the VACUUM.

After looking at this, I think it is salvageable, but the patch as
written complicates the vacuum-to-index-AM API more than necessary;
there's no reason why the AM has to expose the fact that it skipped
doing anything.

I'll clean it up and reapply.

                        regards, tom lane

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

Reply via email to