From: Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>,
    Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
    PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY?
In-reply-to: <202401311004.2yky72qydzxn@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <202401311004.2yky72qydzxn@alvherre.pgsql>
Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
   message dated "Wed, 31 Jan 2024 11:04:24 +0100."
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <6346.1708105409.1@antos>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 18:43:29 +0100
Message-ID: <6347.1708105409@antos>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/6347.1708105409%40antos>
Precedence: bulk

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

> This is great to hear.
> 
> On 2024-Jan-31, Antonin Houska 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.

ok, I'm thinking how can the feature be integrated into the core.

BTW, I'm failing to understand why cluster_rel() has no argument of the
BufferAccessStrategy type. According to buffer/README, the criterion for using
specific strategy is that page "is unlikely to be needed again
soon". Specifically for cluster_rel(), the page will *definitely* not be used
again (unless the VACCUM FULL/CLUSTER command fails): BufferTag contains the
relatin file number and the old relation file is eventually dropped.

Am I missing anything?

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