Jeff Janes escribió: > Is this functionality something we want? If so should it include explicit > vacuum as well as autovac?
Yes. No. > Any opinion about where in the code base it > properly belongs (which obviously depends on whether it should cover manual > vacuum as well)? And does the string need to distinguish between an > autovac and an autoanalyze? autovacuum_do_vac_analyze() is probably the place to add it. I think we should include the wraparound, dovacuum and doanalyze flags in there somehow, yes. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, 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
