Tom Lane wrote: > "Bossart, Nathan" <bossa...@amazon.com> writes: > > On 9/4/17, 10:32 PM, "Simon Riggs" <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> If we want to keep the code simple we must surely consider whether the > >> patch has any utility. > > > ... I'd argue that this feels like a natural extension of the > > VACUUM command, one that I, like others much earlier in this thread, > > was surprised to learn wasn't supported. > > Yeah. To me, one big argument for allowing multiple target tables is that > we allow it for other common utility commands such as TRUNCATE or LOCK > TABLE.
TRUNCATE has actual an feature behind its multi-table ability: you can truncate tables linked by FKs that way, and not otherwise. VACUUM, like LOCK TABLE, have no such benefit. (If one is programatically locking multiple tables, it is easier to do one table per command than many in one command, anyway.) -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
