Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla <srinath2133(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]
Date: 2026-05-26 15:31:33
Message-ID: ahW7vUWvDDJdE4zU@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2026-May-25, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) wrote:

> After listening to the REPACK talk at pgconf.dev this year, I understand that
> WAL accumulation during REPACK CONCURRENTLY is not intended behavior. I think we
> can consider fixing this in the current release. Attached is the rebased
> patch, with comments adjusted based on Chao Li's comments.

You're right, this is a thinko. I'll look at your patch hoping to get
it pushed shortly. I wonder if we should add a TAP test to verify that
WAL files are actually removed? Sounds a bit excessive TBH, but maybe
it isn't really.

--
Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"I think my standards have lowered enough that now I think 'good design'
is when the page doesn't irritate the living f*ck out of me." (JWZ)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Euler Taveira 2026-05-26 15:39:01 Re: NULL pointer dereference in syslogger with load_libraries() and -DEXEC_BACKEND at startup
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2026-05-26 15:26:20 Re: [PATCH] Fix REPACK decoding worker not cleaned up on FATAL exit