Re: AW: AW: AW: Vacuum only with 20% old tuples

Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA@wien.spardat.at> writes:
>> If there are no more records, then you are reduced to guessing whether
>> you have to undo the rename or not.  If you guess wrong, you leave the
>> database in a corrupted state.

> If the original filename exists the rename failed else it succeeded.

That's exactly the unreliable assumption I do not want to make.

> The backends could not have created a new file of the old name
> after "starting rename" beeing last log record. 

So you're assuming that we fsync() the log after *each* item is added?
*Within* a transaction?  fsync only at end of xact was the plan,
I believe.
        regards, tom lane