On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 11:44:25AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> > On 2024-Nov-27, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> Would there be a default?
>
> > There would be no default. Running with no option given would raise an
> > error. The point is: you want to break scripts currently running
> > --analyze-in-stages so that they can make a choice of which of these two
> > modes to run. Your proposal (as I understand it) is to remove the
> > --analyze-in-stages option and add two other options. My proposal is to
> > keep --analyze-in-stages, but require it to have a specifier of which
> > mode to run. Both achieve what you want, but I think mine achieves it
> > in a cleaner way.
>
> I do not like the idea of breaking existing upgrade scripts,
> especially not by requiring them to use a parameter that older
> vacuumdb versions will reject. That makes it impossible to have a
> script that is version independent. I really doubt that there is any
> usability improvement to be had here that's worth that.
>
> How about causing "--analyze-in-stages" (as currently spelled) to
> be a no-op? We could keep the behavior available under some other
> name.
Uh, I guess we could do that, but we should emit something like
"--analyze-in-stages option ignored".
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
When a patient asks the doctor, "Am I going to die?", he means
"Am I going to die soon?"
