MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <202507262156.sb455angijk6@alvherre.pgsql>
 <202510301734.pj4uds3mqxx4@alvherre.pgsql>
In-Reply-To: <202510301734.pj4uds3mqxx4@alvherre.pgsql>
From: jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2025 10:48:21 +0800
Message-ID: 
 <CACJufxFPiasoUXFR4SK2QRq6mnztiX=3F82=8PyBrdocX5awBw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
 Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>,
	Mihail Nikalayeu <mihailnikalayeu@gmail.com>, Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CACJufxFPiasoUXFR4SK2QRq6mnztiX%3D3F82%3D8PyBrdocX5awBw%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 7:17=E2=80=AFAM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip=
.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Here's a new installment of this series, v25, including the CONCURRENTLY
> part, which required some conflict fixes on top of the much-changed
> v24-0001 patch.
>

 <refnamediv>
  <refname>pg_repackdb</refname>
  <refpurpose>repack and analyze a <productname>PostgreSQL</productname>
  database</refpurpose>
 </refnamediv>

but with --all option specified, it's doing repack whole cluster.
(more than one database).
I am not fully sure this description is OK.


I think pg_repackdb Synopsis section:
pg_repackdb [connection-option...] [option...] [ -t | --table table [(
column [,...] )] ] ... [ dbname | -a | --all ]
pg_repackdb [connection-option...] [option...] [ -n | --schema schema
] ... [ dbname | -a | --all ]
pg_repackdb [connection-option...] [option...] [ -N | --exclude-schema
schema ] ... [ dbname | -a | --all ]

can be simplified the same way as as pg_dump:

pg_repackdb [connection-option...] [option...]  [ dbname | -a | --all ]

------------------------
[-d] dbname
[--dbname=3D]dbname

what do you think to expand it as below:
dbname
-d dbname
--dbname=3Ddbname
--------------------

+ printf(_("      --index[=3DINDEX]             repack following an index\n=
"));
should it be
+ printf(_("--index[=3DINDEX]                   repack following an index\n=
"));
?


similar to pg_dump:
    printf(_("\nIf no database name is supplied, then the PGDATABASE
environment\n"
             "variable value is used.\n\n"));

in pg_repackdb help section, we can mention:
    printf(_("\nIf no database name is supplied and --all option not
specified then the PGDATABASE environment\n"
             "variable value is used.\n\n"));
Do you think it's necessary?


what the expectation of
pg_repackdb --index=3Dindex_name, the doc is not very helpful.

pg_repackdb --analyze --index=3Dzz --verbose
pg_repackdb: repacking database "src3"
pg_repackdb: error: processing of database "src3" failed: ERROR:  "zz"
is not an index for table "tenk1"

select pg_get_indexdef ('zz'::regclass);
                  pg_get_indexdef
---------------------------------------------------
 CREATE INDEX zz ON public.tenk2 USING btree (two)

------
jian he
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com