Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> writes: > Tom Lane escribió: >> I don't find a lot wrong with that. The code defines its purpose as >> being to shorten the table file length. Once it hits a page that >> can't be emptied, it cannot shorten the file any further, so why >> shouldn't it stop?
> All that work, and it wasn't capable of defragging the other pages? At > the very least it could register them in the FSM. You mean like vac_update_fsm() ? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers