Re: problems with toast.* reloptions

On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 11:25:39AM +0530, solai v wrote:
> I tested the TOAST reloptions behavior locally on current HEAD and was
> able to reproduce the inheritance and RESET scenarios discussed in the
> thread.
> From my testing, explicit toast.reloptions behave independently from
> parent reloptions. After setting both parent and TOAST vacuum_truncate
> values, RESET(vacuum_truncate) on the parent table cleared only the
> parent reloption while the explicit TOAST reloption remained intact.
> I also tried applying the v1-0004 patch in a clean worktree, but most
> hunks in vacuum.c and autovacuum.c no longer apply cleanly against
> current HEAD due to code drift. From inspecting the rejected hunks, it
> looks like the patch approach was to dynamically combine parent and
> TOAST reloptions during VACUUM/autovacuum execution instead of copying
> inherited reloptions directly into the TOAST relation.

I humbly encourage you to read the rest of the thread. In particular, I'm
curious whether anyone would object to removing the TOAST reloptions.

--
nathan