Re: vacuum_truncate configuration parameter and isset_offset - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: vacuum_truncate configuration parameter and isset_offset
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwYTw=ruESkWDn_fgtoQhJ8L5km3y6gbvMz2e9wWdA+ktg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: vacuum_truncate configuration parameter and isset_offset  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 8:41 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.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.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Windows: openssl & gssapi dislike each other
Next
From: Daniel Gustafsson
Date:
Subject: Re: Windows: openssl & gssapi dislike each other