Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Mahendra Singh Thalor <mahi6run(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]
Date: 2026-03-16 19:26:49
Message-ID: 202603161919.qyoq6vbrjifq@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2026-Mar-16, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:

> postgres=#* repack test1, test2;*
> ERROR: syntax error at or near ","
> LINE 1: repack test1, test2;
> ^
>
> I was not expecting any error but maybe I am missing something (some patch
> needs to be applied to test this query?).

Yeah, there's no support for repacking multiple tables in one command.
This is intentional. I think it'd be not very hard to add. But why?
People isn't likely to be running emergency VACUUM FULL on multiple
large tables in this way, listing multiple of them in a single command,
IMO anyway. So I think we don't need it.

(I think this is not similar to the case where normal vacuum is being
run in an emergency for XID wraparound purposes, which the ability to
run on multiple tables is more valuable. But at the same time, vacuumdb
does a much better job at that, since it can process multiple tables in
parallel.)

--
Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jack Bonatakis 2026-03-16 19:28:06 Re: Read-only connection mode for AI workflows.
Previous Message Matthias van de Meent 2026-03-16 19:24:45 Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]