Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Here is my proposed patch.
> Actually, the original patch in this series was fairly horrid, and
> things haven't been made better by the subsequent changes.  It lacked
> any comment explaining what it was doing; failed to comment on the way
> it was abusing heap_freeze_tuple (the latter thinks it's getting a tuple
> that's in a disk buffer); and IMHO puts the heap_freeze_tuple call in
> the wrong place anyway.  raw_heap_insert has no business editorializing
> on the tuple it's given.  It'd be better to have the call in
> rewrite_heap_tuple, which is already busy messing with the tuple's
> visibility info.  Perhaps like this, in addition to your changes:

Applied, thanks.  Let me know if there is still something you don't like
about the current state of cluster or truncate.

The part about actually advancing relfrozenxid is still not done though ...

Alvaro Herrera                      
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

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

Reply via email to