Re: DROP TABLE and autovacuum

ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> If we tries to drop the table on which autovacuum is running, we have to
> wait finish of the vacuum. However, the vacuuming effort goes to waste for
> the table being dropped or rewritten. Meanwhile, we've already had the
> autovacuum killer triggered in CREATE/DROP/RENAME DATABASE commands.
> Can we extend the feature to several TABLE commands?

> One simple solution is that every time a non-autovacuum backend tries to
> access a table with a lock equal or stronger than SHARE UPDATE EXCLUSIVE,
> the backend checks whether some autovacuum workers are vacuuming the table
> and send SIGINT to them.

I don't think this is a good idea at all. You're proposing putting a
dangerous sledgehammer into a core part of the system in order to fix a
fairly minor annoyance.

For the specific case of DROP TABLE, a SIGINT might be a good idea
but I don't agree with it for any weaker action.

regards, tom lane