On Fri, 15 May 2026 at 10:36, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 9:46 PM Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> wrote:
> > > Thanks for the patch! It looks good to me.
> > > Unless there are objections, I will commit it.
> >
> > Yeah, looks good to me, thanks.
>
> I've pushed the patch. Thanks!
>
> > Fine with me. I wouldn't have a problem saying it's a backpatchable
> > bugfix, but it's certainly not very high priority or criticality.
>
> Agreed.
>
>
> BTW, while testing REPACK boolean options, I found two other issues
> in their parsing.
>
> First, REPACK (CONCURRENTLY OFF) failed with:
>
> ERROR: unrecognized REPACK option "concurrently"
>
> even though REPACK (CONCURRENTLY ON) works correctly. That is,
> CONCURRENTLY was treated as an unrecognized option when disabled.
>
> Second, when the same option is specified multiple times, the last value
> is not always honored. In particular, if any occurrence sets an option to ON,
> the option remains enabled even when the final setting is OFF.
>
> I think these are bugs, and the attached patch fixes them. Thoughts?
I saw this just got committed. Is there a reason the option handling
for this, VACUUM, and EXPLAIN aren't done in one place?
Thom
