On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 8:43 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> Ah, I missed that. I think that in the test case I was using, there
> was a conflicting pin but there were no dead tuples, so that line
> wasn't present in the output.
Even if there was a DEAD tuple, your test would still have to account
for
On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 11:33 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 5:57 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> > I was dismayed to learn that VACUUM VERBOSE on a table no longer tells
> > you anything about whether any pages were skipped due to pins.
>
> VACUUM VERBOSE will show a dedicated line
On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 5:57 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> I was dismayed to learn that VACUUM VERBOSE on a table no longer tells
> you anything about whether any pages were skipped due to pins.
VACUUM VERBOSE will show a dedicated line that reports on the number
of pages that we couldn't get a
Hi,
I was dismayed to learn that VACUUM VERBOSE on a table no longer tells
you anything about whether any pages were skipped due to pins. Now the
obvious explanation for that is that we no longer skip pages entirely
just because we find that they are pinned. But I think failing to
fully process a
