Tom Lane wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> writes: >> So I guess what I'm asking is: Does anyone see any show-stoppers in >> removing VACUUM FULL, and does anyone want to step up to the plate and >> promise to do it before release? > > I don't see much problem with rejecting VAC FULL in a HS master, > whether or not it gets removed altogether. Why not just do that > rather than write a lot of kluges?
Hmm. At the moment, no action is required in the master to allow hot standby in the slave, except for turning on archiving. The additional overhead of the extra logging that's needed in the master is small enough that there has been no need for a switch. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
