> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I didn't see anything that looked like an immediate change in user table
>> contents, unless they used the "name" type; but what of relation forks?
> Relation forks didn't change anything inside relation files, so no scanning of
> relations is required because of that. Neither will the FSM rewrite. Not sure
> about DSM yet.
And just to confirm -- they don't change the name of the files the postmaster
expects to find in its data directory, right?
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support!