Re: REPACK and naming

On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 05:05:38PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 10:59:55AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > I mean, it's PRETTY confusing that VACUUM FULL does something much
> > more similar to CLUSTER than it is to VACUUM. We can't ever get out
> > from under that confusion if we don't change something. I think it's
> > more than fair to bikeshed what the verb should be that describes the
> > action we currently describe by writing either VACUUM FULL or CLUSTER,
> > but I agree with Álvaro that having one verb for both of those things
> > makes a lot more sense than the status quo.
>
> Yeah, I think we are in a bad naming place here with VACUUM FULL and
> CLUSTER, and avoiding clarifying it because of a risk of future change
> just seems unwise. We know it is confusing, and there are no plans to
> expand VACUUM FULL or CLUSTER, so let's improve the user interface and
> take the hit if things ever change in the future.

Uh, if VACUUM FULL and CLUSTER functionality are going to eventually
point to REPACK, REPACK is the wrong name. While I can see REPACK
having a similar function to VACUUM FULL, the ordering idea of CLUSTER
just doesn't fit into "repack". I am repacking in a specific order?
What if I only want the order changed without repacking? When did I
pack that I have to re-pack now?

Of the names I have seen, I think REBUILD makes the most sense. I built
the table --- I want it rebuilt now, and perhaps with a specific
ordering.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.