Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > A patch prototype to make zero_damaged_pages work as advertised is > enclosed, though the current behaviour may well be preferred, in which > case a doc patch is more appropriate.
I don't think this is a good idea, and even if it were, the proposed patch is a model of obscurantism. > However, since autovacuum the window of opportunity for support to > assist with data recovery is smaller and somewhat random. Hmm .... it'd probably be a good idea to force zero_damaged_pages OFF in the autovac subprocess. That parameter is only intended for interactive use --- as you say, autovac would be a rather nasty loose cannon if it fired up with this parameter ON. Are there any other things that ought to be disabled in autovac? regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend