Tom Lane wrote: > We got another report today [1] that seems to be due to the problem > we've seen before with failed vacuum truncations leaving corrupt state > on-disk [2]. Reflecting on that some more, [...]
This may seem heretical, but I'll say it anyway. Why don't we do away with vacuum truncation for good? Is that a feature that does anybody any good? To me it has always seemed to be more a wart than a feature, like someone just thought it was low hanging fruit without considering all the implications. VACUUM doesn't reclaim space, VACUUM (FULL) does. That's the way it (mostly) is, so why complicate matters unnecessarily? Yours, Laurenz Albe
