Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
Subject: Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze
Date: 2014-01-02 20:06:34
Message-ID: 14780.1388693194@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Well, that's fair enough. I don't mind having two functions. Should
> the whole-table function also include invisible tuples?

Certainly, that's exactly why I was proposing it. You can do a join
if you want to suppress them.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2014-01-02 20:09:52 Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze
Previous Message Robert Haas 2014-01-02 20:02:56 Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze