Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> 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 ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
