Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY?

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:

> On 2024-Jul-09, Antonin Houska wrote:
> 
> > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > > Is your plan to work on it soon or should I try to write a draft patch? (I
> > > > assume this is for PG >= 18.)
> > > 
> > > I don't have plans for it, so if you have resources, please go for it.
> > 
> > The first version is attached. The actual feature is in 0003. 0004 is probably
> > not necessary now, but I haven't realized until I coded it.
> 
> Thank you, this is great.  I'll be studying this during the next
> commitfest.

Thanks. I'll register it in the CF application.


> BTW I can apply 0003 from this email perfectly fine, but you're right
> that the archives don't show the file name.  I suspect the
> "Content-Disposition: inline" PLUS the Content-Type text/plain are what
> cause the problem -- for instance, [1] doesn't have a problem and they
> do have inline content disposition, but the content-type is not
> text/plain.  In any case, I encourage you not to send patches as
> tarballs :-)
> 
> [1]  https://postgr.es/m/32781.1714378236@antos

You're right, "Content-Disposition" is the problem. I forgot that "attachment"
is better for patches and my email client (emacs+nmh) defaults to
"inline". I'll pay attention next time.


-- 
Antonin Houska
Web: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com