| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: REPACK and naming |
| Date: | 2025-09-17 20:35:06 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvrr1ZqdNnZ8exqz6vX9bGbr=WmCKj6kbKE1B+ay6FYh8Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 18 Sept 2025 at 01:09, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> RETABLE just isn't a word. The code sometimes calls this a REWRITE of
> a table, which would be reasonable.
+1. I was reading this yesterday wondering why "REWRITE" didn't get a
mention. The problem I have with REPACK is that "re" indicates that
something is being re-done that's been done before. If you're calling
REPACK for the first time on a table, that's not true.
David J's "REBUILD" also seems ok. In a green field, you could then
have "REBUILD TABLE ..." and "REBUILD INDEX ..."
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-09-17 20:38:56 | Re: New string-truncation warnings from GCC 15 |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2025-09-17 20:23:46 | Re: Remove PointerIsValid() |