Re: [PATCH] Improve REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) error messages for unsupported configurations

From: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>
To: Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Baji Shaik <baji(dot)pgdev(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve REPACK (CONCURRENTLY) error messages for unsupported configurations
Date: 2026-05-28 18:35:27
Message-ID: ahiKMDxJ-G4bAy8Q@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2026-May-27, Chao Li wrote:

> > 0002 -- check_concurrent_repack_requirements() reports the same
> > generic "no identity index" error for several distinct
> > cases, two of which are misleading: REPLICA IDENTITY FULL
> > (which is set, but the hint says there is no identity), and
> > a deferrable PK as the only identity (skipped per commit
> > 832e220d99a, but the hint suggests adding an index that
> > already exists). Distinguish these cases.
>
> When I was working on 832e220d99a, I actually considered for more
> detailed error messages, but I ended up giving up. I think we should
> be careful about adding more branches here unless the existing message
> is causing significant confusion in practice.

I pushed this one too (well, something close to it anyway), because I
think the replica identity issue could be an (unnecessary) usability
tripwire.

I'm curious to know why you gave up on this, if you want to share more.

Thanks both,

--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Voy a acabar con todos los humanos / con los humanos yo acabaré
voy a acabar con todos (bis) / con todos los humanos acabaré ¡acabaré! (Bender)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2026-05-28 18:40:52 Re: dependencyLockAndCheckObject(): dependent vs referenced
Previous Message Robert Haas 2026-05-28 18:29:27 Re: sandboxing untrusted code