| From: | Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Victor Yegorov <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reviewing freeze map code |
| Date: | 2016-05-18 20:07:56 |
| Message-ID: | 573CCB9C.50705@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 05/18/2016 03:51 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> How about going with something that says more about why we are doing
>> it, rather than trying to describe in one or two words what it is
>> doing?
>>
>> VACUUM (FORENSIC)
>>
>> VACUUM (DEBUG)
>>
>> VACUUM (LINT)
>
> +1
Maybe this is the wrong perspective. I mean, is there a reason we even
need this option, other than a lack of any other way to do a full table
scan to check for corruption, etc.? If we're only doing this for
integrity checking, then maybe it's better if it becomes a function,
which could be later extended with additional forensic features?
--
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2016-05-18 20:17:13 | PgLogical 1.1 feedback |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2016-05-18 19:51:07 | Re: Reviewing freeze map code |