Horton

Re: vacuum_truncate configuration parameter and isset_offset

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Nikolay Shaplov <dhyan@nataraj.su>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>, Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>, Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet@singh.im>, Will Storey <will@summercat.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 2025-03-24T19:26:17Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 10:12:05PM +0300, Nikolay Shaplov wrote:
> And second general idea: changing engine is bad, at least when you can manage 
> without changing it.

You have asserted this a couple of times without providing any reasons why.
I know of no general project policy about changing the reloption code.  I
would expect this code to evolve just like any other part of Postgres,
whether it's to improve performance or to expand the feature set.

-- 
nathan