Re: Visibility map thoughts

Marko Kreen wrote:
> On 11/6/07, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> (Gosh, we really need a name for the sort of vacuum. I was about to say
>> "we'd still need regular regular VACUUMs" :-))
> 
> As the new VACUUM variant will be somewhat unsafe, it should
> not replace "regular" VACUUM but get separate name.

What do you mean by unsafe? It is supposed to reclaim all dead tuples a 
normal vacuum would, except for HOT updated tuples that can be pruned 
without scanning indexes. It doesn't advance the relfrozenxid or update 
stats, though.

> VACUUM FAST maybe?  Informally "fastvacuum".  Something with
> "lazy" or "partial" would also be possibility.

We already call the regular vacuum "lazy" in the source code, as opposed 
to VACUUM FULL. Partial is also bit misleading; while it doesn't scan 
the whole table, it should find all dead tuples.

--   Heikki Linnakangas  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com