Re: Vacuuming leaked temp tables (once again)

Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> We might have to rearrange the logic a bit to make that happen (I'm not
> >> sure what order things get tested in), but a log message does seem like
> >> a good idea.  I'd go for logging anytime an orphaned table is seen,
> >> and dropping once it's past the anti-wraparound horizon.
> 
> > I don't think this requires much of a rearrangement -- see autovacuum.c
> > 1921ff.
> 
> Hmm, maybe I'm missing something but I see no good way to do it without
> refactoring relation_check_autovac.

Hmm, oops :-)

> Since that function is only called in one place, I'm thinking of just
> inlining it; do you see a reason not to?

Nope, go ahead.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.