Re: Reviewing freeze map code
От | Joshua D. Drake |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Reviewing freeze map code |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 572D060B.5050503@commandprompt.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Reviewing freeze map code (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Reviewing freeze map code
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 05/06/2016 01:58 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Joshua D. Drake (jd@commandprompt.com) wrote: >> 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. > > Isn't that exactly what this FORCE option being contemplated would do > though? Plow through the entire relation, regardless of what the VM > says is all frozen or not? > > Seems like FORCE is a good word for that to me. Except that we aren't FORCING a vacuum. That is the part I have contention with. To me, FORCE means: No matter what else is happening, we are vacuuming this relation (think locks). But I am also not going to dig in my heals. If that is truly what -hackers come up with, thank you at least considering what I said. Sincerely, JD > > Thanks! > > Stephen > -- Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: