From: Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
cc: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>,
    Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>,
    pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: REPACK (ANALYZE) within transaction block segfaults
In-reply-to: <apfbHj9TkfvlOeJ3@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <apfbHj9TkfvlOeJ3@alvherre.pgsql>
Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
   message dated "Wed, 02 Sep 2026 10:20:20 +0200."
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <15396.1788338846.1@localhost>
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2026 10:47:26 +0200
Message-ID: <15397.1788338846@localhost>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/15397.1788338846%40localhost>
Precedence: bulk

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> wrote:

> 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.

Maybe the question was about the wording - "synonym" might indicate that both
commands execute the same code. Perhaps the comment should rather say that
REPACK (ANALYZE) is (intended to be) a replacement of VACUUM (FULL, ANALYZE).

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