Re: Confine vacuum skip logic to lazy_scan_skip

Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> Here's a patch.  Is there a tidier way to write this?

Hmm, I think not with the current set of primitives.  We could think
about refactoring them, but that's not a job for a band-aid patch.

> It should probably be back-patched to 17, because external code might
> use per-buffer data (obviously v17 core doesn't or skink would have
> told us this sooner).   It's not a good time to push to 17 today,
> though.  Push to master now to cheer skink up and 17 some time later
> when the coast is clear, or just wait?

Agreed that right now is a bad time to push this to v17 --- we need to
keep the risk factors as low as possible for the re-release.  Master
now and v17 after the re-wrap seems like the right compromise.

            regards, tom lane