Horton

Re: Vacuuming leaked temp tables (once again)

Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>
Date: 2008-06-27T16:12:20Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
"Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

> The main attractions of this idea are avoiding the corrupt-index issue and
> not doing vacuuming work that's 99.99% sure to be useless.

It does seem strange to me to vacuum a table you're pretty sure is useless
*and* quite likely corrupt.

Could autovacuum emit log messages as soon as it sees such tables and start
dropping them at some point later?

-- 
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services!