Re: Reviewing freeze map code

On 2016-05-06 14:03:11 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 05/06/2016 02:01 PM, Josh berkus wrote:
> > On 05/06/2016 01:58 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > On 2016-05-06 13:54:09 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > > > On 05/06/2016 01:50 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > 
> > > > > There already is FREEZE - meaning something different - so I doubt it.
> > > > 
> > > > Yeah I thought about that, it is the word "FORCE" that bothers me. When you
> > > > use FORCE there is an assumption that no matter what, it plows through
> > > > (think rm -f). So if we don't use FROZEN, that's cool but FORCE doesn't work
> > > > either.
> > > 
> > > SCANALL?
> > > 
> > 
> > VACUUM THEWHOLEDAMNTHING
> > 
> 
> I know that would never fly but damn if that wouldn't be an awesome keyword
> for VACUUM.

It bothers me more than it probably should: Nobdy tests, reviews,
whatever a complex patch with significant data-loss potential. But as
soon somebody dares to mention an option name...