Re: Vacuum DB in Postgres Vs similar concept in other RDBMS

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Exactly.  VACUUM sucks (ahem) in all ways but one: it pushes the
> maintenance costs associated with MVCC out of the foreground query code
> paths and into an asynchronous cleanup task.  AFAIK we are the only DBMS
> that does it that way.  Personally I believe it's a fundamentally
> superior approach --- because when you are under peak load you can defer
> the cleanup work --- but you do need to pay attention to make sure that
> the async cleanup isn't postponed too long.  We're still fooling around
> with autovacuum and related tuning issues to make it work painlessly...
>

Should this paragraph be added to the FAQ here?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ.html