Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 17:10 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I don't like your wording though; it feels too verbose (and you're
>> losing the ANALYZE in case it's doing both things). How about
>>
>> snprintf(activity, MAX_AUTOVAC_ACTIV_LEN,
>> "autovacuum: VACUUM%s%s", vac
>> tab->at_doanalyze ? " ANALYZE" : "",
>> tab->at_wraparound ? " (wraparound)" : "");
> Yes, looks good.
May I suggest "(to prevent wraparound)" or something like that?
Otherwise, +1.
>> You're not proposing it for 8.3 right?
> I think I am. It's an important diagnostic for your other fix.
I agree, this is important for visibility into what's happening.
The string isn't getting translated so I don't see any big downside
to applying the patch in back branches.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches
