Hi, On 2023-09-28 11:25:04 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > I went ahead and committed 0001. If Andres still wants to push for > more renaming there, that can be a follow-up patch.
Agreed. > And we can see if he or anyone else has any comments on this new version of > 0002. To me we're down into the level of details that probably don't matter > very much one way or the other, but others may disagree. The only thought I have is that it might be worth to amend the comment in lazy_scan_prune() to mention that such a tuple won't need to be frozen, because it was visible to another session when vacuum started. Greetings, Andres Freund
