Re: vacuum_truncate configuration parameter and isset_offset

On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 8:41 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Nathan has already had to spend a significant amount of time engaging

with this thread over what I think should be a complete non-event, and
> will probably have to spend more, and all that takes away from time
> that could, for example, be spent reviewing and committing other
> patches. And for what?
>

A broader awareness of what is going on in this little corner of an
expansive codebase. And making explicit those little unwritten rules
happened upon by accident so many years ago, and their consequences.

I don't see where anyone has done something wrong or bad. This touched new
territory in a patch that otherwise few people likely cared about - the
vacuum_truncate feature itself being already developed - a post-commit
realization and discussion was the most likely outcome. Nikolay's desire
for an API-only thread/patch in which to have this discussion does match
with ideal circumstances but is not a practical reality. I wouldn't be too
hard on him for expressing that desire - I'm sure we've all wished to not
be surprised in this way.

A more concrete explanation of the effect of this patch on other work would
be nice to have; and maybe we keep the patch in until we all get a better
feel of the negative side-effects that are presently just being
alluded to. This can all easily wait until May.

David J.