Re: vacuum_truncate configuration parameter and isset_offset

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nikolay Shaplov <dhyan(at)nataraj(dot)su>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet(at)singh(dot)im>, Will Storey <will(at)summercat(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: vacuum_truncate configuration parameter and isset_offset
Date: 2025-03-26 15:28:26
Message-ID: Z-QdGq24pOqNen6s@nathan
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 08:09:53AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> I'm willing to say "I don't know why this is so very important to Nikolay,
> but I trust him that it is, and since my opinion isn't that strong and this
> isn't a big deal, so I will accommodate the person screaming that adding
> this will make their life miserable in a real way." Maybe others need more
> evidence of what that misery looks like?

To summarize the discussion thus far, Robert and I seem to be okay with
isset_offset, David is leaning no (+.25 yes and -.75 no), and Niolay and
Álvaro appear to favor an enum approach, which would look like this [0].
That's +2.25 and -2.75.

Is that an accurate analysis of where folks stand?

[0] https://postgr.es/m/attachment/174762/v2-0001-change-vacuum_truncate-relopt-to-enum.patch

--
nathan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2025-03-26 15:38:57 Re: Current master hangs under the debugger after Parallel Seq Scan (Linux, MacOS)
Previous Message Jasper Smit 2025-03-26 15:26:14 Assertion with aborted UPDATE in subtransaction