Re: pgbench -f and vacuum

On 14 December 2014 at 13:50, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 12/13/14, 6:17 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
>> Problem with "-f implies -n" approach is, it breaks backward
>> compatibility. There are use cases using custom script*and* pgbench_*
>> tables. For example the particular user wants to use the standard
>> pgbench tables and is not satisfied with the built in scenario. I know
>> at least one user does this way.
>>
>
> If we care enough about that case to attempt the vacuum anyway then we
> need to do something about the error message; either squelch it or check
> for the existence of the tables before attempting to vacuum. Since there's
> no way to squelch in the server logfile, I think checking for the table is
> the right answer.
>
>
Maybe someone can write a patch for VACUUM IF EXISTS ... :-)

/me hides

Regards

David Rowley