On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 01:54:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 07:31:03PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> I am not saying it shouldn't be improved, I just don't see the point of
> >> bringing it up while everyone is busy with the last CF and claiming it
> >> is unusable and that stating that it is surprisising that nobody really
> >> cares.
>
> > Well, I brought it up in September too. My point was not that it is a
> > new issue but that it has been such an ignored issue for two years. I
> > am not asking for a fix, but right now we don't even have a plan on how
> > to improve this.
>
> Indeed, and considering that we're all busy with the CF, I think it's
> quite unreasonable of you to expect that we'll drop everything else
> to think about this problem right now. The reason it's like it is
> is that it's not easy to see how to make it better; so even if we did
> drop everything else, it's not clear to me that any plan would emerge
> anytime soon.
Well, documenting the VACUUM requirement and adding it to the TODO list
are things we should consider for 9.4. If you think doing that after
the commit-fest is best, I can do that.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +