Re: reloption to prevent VACUUM from truncating empty pages at the end of relation

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: "Jamison, Kirk" <k(dot)jamison(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, 'Amit Kapila' <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: reloption to prevent VACUUM from truncating empty pages at the end of relation
Date: 2019-02-01 08:26:58
Message-ID: 20190201082658.GN2179@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 09:11:50AM +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> Jamison, Kirk wrote:
>> I wonder if there is a better reloption name for
>> shrink_enabled. (truncate_enabled, vacuum_enabled? Hmm. No?)
>> On the other hand, shrink_enabled seems to describe well what it's
>> supposed to do when vacuuming tables. Besides there's a
>> similarly-named autovacuum_enabled option.
>
> I like "shrink_enabled".
>
> It may sound weird in the ears of PostgreSQL hackers, but will make
> sense to users.
>
> Perhaps "vacuum_shrink_enabled" would be even better.

Naming it just vacuum_truncate and autovacuum_truncate (with aliases
for toast and such), looks more natural to me. "shrink" is not a term
used in the code at all to describe this phase of vacuuming, and this
option talks mainly to people who are experts in PostgreSQL internals
in my opinion.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2019-02-01 08:30:12 Re: ALTER SESSION
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2019-02-01 08:22:19 Re: current_logfiles not following group access and instead follows log_file_mode permissions