Re: analyze-in-stages post upgrade questions

On Wed, Aug 06, 2025 at 11:25:53PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2025 at 1:01 PM Mircea Cadariu <cadariu(dot)mircea(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Overall, I like the change. But I have one question: should this be treated as
>> a bug fix that we back-patch to supported branches, or is it more of
>> an improvement that should only go into master?
>>
>> I reckon it might make sense to back-patch it to previous versions, as users might not upgrade always to the latest version.
>
> I understand your point. But on second thought, since the patch changes
> behavior, I'm leaning toward treating it as an improvement, so it should
> only go to master...

I also am leaning towards treating this as v19 material. It's a nontrivial
behavior change, and this option is useful for major version upgrades,
which is an area that we really don't want to surprise users too much.
Furthermore, auto-analyze doesn't process partitioned tables, either, so
this introduces a bit of divergence. (I'd love to see that project picked
up again someday. Perhaps I will take a gander...)

--
nathan