Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla <srinath2133(at)gmail(dot)com>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]
Date: 2026-04-20 14:42:06
Message-ID: 260901.1776696126@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> On 2026-Apr-20, Antonin Houska wrote:
>> Is this an attempt to disable REPACK (CONCURRENTLY)? That would require
>> wal_level=minimal (due to commit 67c20979ce). In which way does REPACK seem to
>> break test_plan_advice?

> No, quite the contrary. That test normally runs with wal_level=minimal,
> which causes REPACK to complain that it cannot start logical
> decoding.

So what you're saying is that the core regression tests will now fail
with wal_level=minimal? I don't see how that can possibly be
considered acceptable from a global standpoint; we might as well
remove wal_level=minimal, because it will never again get tested.

I think you need to move these tests out into some other test suite
(or make a new one).

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Antonin Houska 2026-04-20 14:52:15 Re: repack: fix a bug to reject deferrable primary key fallback for concurrent mode
Previous Message Ayush Tiwari 2026-04-20 14:34:54 Re: [PATCH] Reject ENCODING option for COPY TO FORMAT JSON