On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 2:48 AM Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 3:12 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Adding a field-and-value style option might be worth. Or maybe we can > > add one option for example freeze_without_index_cleanup? > > That seems non-orthogonal. We have an existing flag to force freezing > (FREEZE); we don't need a second option that does the same thing. > Skipping the index scans (and thus necessarily the second heap pass) > is a separate behavior which we don't currently have a way to control. >
We already have disable_page_skipping option, not (page_skipping false). So ISMT disable_index_cleanup would be more natural. Also, since what to do with this option is not only skipping vacuum indexes but also skipping removeing dead tuples on heap, I think that the option should have a more understandable name for users indicating that both it removes dead tuples less than the normal vacuum and it's aimed to freeze tuple more faster. Of course we document them, though. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center
