On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 7:57 AM Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > > The if-we're-going-to-delay-anyway path in vacuum_delay_point seems > > OK to add a touch more overhead to, though. > > Alright, for this part at least, seems like it'd be something like the > attached. > > Only lightly tested, but does seem to address the specific example which > was brought up on this thread. > > Thoughts..?
+1
