Re: New vacuum option to do only freezing
Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>,
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-03-08T05:10:27Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 12:04 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 1:03 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hmm, the patch already has new reloption vacuum_index_cleanup and > > default value is true but you meant I should change its name to > > index_cleanup? > > No, I mean that you should make it so that someone writes VACUUM > (INDEX_CLEANUP false) instead of VACUUM (DISABLE_INDEX_CLEANUP). > IIUC we've discussed the field-and-value style vacuum option. I suggested that since we have already the disable_page_skipping option the disable_page_skipping option would be more natural style and consistent. I think "VACUUM (INDEX_CLEANUP false)" seems consistent with its reloption but not with other vacuum options. So why does only this option (and probably up-coming new options) need to support new style? Do we need the same change to the existing options? Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center
Commits
-
Add toast-level reloption for vacuum_index_cleanup
- ce59b75d449d 12.0 landed
-
heap_prepare_freeze_tuple: Simplify coding
- 2bf372a4ae26 12.0 landed
-
Fix missing word.
- 6665305e17ed 12.0 landed
-
Allow VACUUM to be run with index cleanup disabled.
- a96c41feec6b 12.0 landed
-
Don't mark pages all-visible spuriously
- d2599ecfcc74 11.0 cited