Re: REPACK (ANALYZE) within transaction block segfaults

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: REPACK (ANALYZE) within transaction block segfaults
Date: 2026-09-02 08:20:20
Message-ID: apfbHj9TkfvlOeJ3@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2026-Sep-02, Fujii Masao wrote:

> + * that's just consistent with VACUUM (FULL, ANALYZE), which is a
> + * synonym for REPACK (ANALYZE).
>
> Is VACUUM (FULL, ANALYZE) really a synonym for REPACK (ANALYZE)?

That's the intent, at least. If there are things that work differently,
I would strive to change them so that they do work the same. However,
some such changes might be too invasive for pg19, but I would still see
about changing those in pg20.

Now, maybe there are things about VACUUM FULL ANALYZE that we don't like
(perhaps, for instance, they exist solely because of even older
backwards compatibility concerns) that we would prefer not to have in
REPACK. I don't know if anything of that sort exists, but if so, I
would propose to seek decisions for each thing individually.

--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Essentially, you're proposing Kevlar shoes as a solution for the problem
that you want to walk around carrying a loaded gun aimed at your foot.
(Tom Lane)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais 2026-09-02 08:24:15 Re: Possible Visibility Map corruption in supported branches?
Previous Message Andrei Lepikhov 2026-09-02 08:19:29 Re: SUM(int2)/SUM(int4) do not detect overflow of the int8 accumulator