Horton

Re: New vacuum option to do only freezing

Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-04-17T19:20:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 10:46 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Yeah, if we wanted to expose these complications more directly, we
> could think about adding or changing the main counters.  I was wondering
> about whether we should have it report "x bytes and y line pointers
> freed", rather than counting tuples per se.

I like that idea, but I'm pretty sure that there are very few users
that are aware of these distinctions at all. It would be a good idea
to clearly document them.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan

Commits

  1. Add toast-level reloption for vacuum_index_cleanup

  2. heap_prepare_freeze_tuple: Simplify coding

  3. Fix missing word.

  4. Allow VACUUM to be run with index cleanup disabled.

  5. Don't mark pages all-visible spuriously