| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: vacuumdb and new VACUUM options |
| Date: | 2019-05-20 01:17:31 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwFw0Yvq9o5CojvPsVcXVv=_c-Oat1zhWByH10th82kh2Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 7:19 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 01:11:53PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > My impression is that these are better treated as feature work, to be
> > tackled in v13. I see no urgency to push this for v12. There's still
> > some disagreements on how parts of this are implemented, and we've beta1
> > coming up.
>
> It is true that we have lived without some options in vacuumdb while
> these were already introduced at the SQL level, so I am in favor of
> what you suggest here. Fujii-san, what do you think?
I'm ok to drop this from open items for v12 because this is not a bug.
Let's work on this next CommitFest.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2019-05-20 01:20:21 | Re: Statistical aggregate functions are not working with PARTIAL aggregation |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-05-20 00:22:11 | Re: Avoiding hash join batch explosions with extreme skew and weird stats |