Thanks for considering our special scenario. I did not use the vacuum freeze option because the documentation said it is going to be deprecrated. Based on the positive votes so far, I gather that a vacuum (freeze) syntax will be supported in some version in the future, until then, I can continue to use the existing vacuum freeze syntax? I did try it and it works.
Thank you, Srini ________________________________ From: Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> To: Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> Cc: Kevin Grittner <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov>; Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com>; Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us>; pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Srini Raghavan <sixersr...@yahoo.com> Sent: Fri, January 14, 2011 3:36:02 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Database file copy On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> writes: >> If we're going to be supporting that long term, we should probably >> change the note about FREEZE being deprecated, though. > >> So, still +1 on removing the wording about FREEZE being deprecated, >> but instead we should mention what actually *is* deprecated (the >> omission of the parentheses). > > If we're going to do that, we should deprecate the unparenthesized > syntax altogether, with an eye to de-reserving VERBOSE and ANALYZE > as well. I'm not wildly enthusiastic about breaking this with only one intervening release. We normally support deprecated syntax for quite a bit longer than that. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
