REPACK and naming
| От | David G. Johnston |
|---|---|
| Тема | REPACK and naming |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAKFQuwYremPM3s50e_a0MBwz37=Djg=tOExeVzcto9aW2NudZg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: REPACK and naming (Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br>) |
| Ответы |
Re: REPACK and naming
Re: REPACK and naming |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wednesday, September 17, 2025, Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br> wrote:
Em ter., 16 de set. de 2025 às 23:01, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> escreveu:I think RETABLE is not a proposal to be taken seriously. That's
extremely confusing.This feature could be used in a future version to rearrange fields in a table, for better padding.I don't think we have another one available for this purpose.CREATE TABLE T(A text, B integer, C bigint, D integer);We could have something likeRETABLE T USING(B, D, C, A)
That changes logical aspects of a table and so would be done as part of alter table, IMO. “AT tbl Rearrange columns (names list) “
I’m not a fan of “retable” as a command keyword.
But this digresses from the topic at hand.
I’m fine with repack itself. Deprecating vacuum full would be nice - but actually renaming existing things is bound to just make matters worse, IMO.
Concretely, maybe we should remove vacuum full from the vacuum command page, and just call it out as compatibility spelling of repack on its page. Maybe do the same for cluster (I haven’t dived into the new feature enough to confidently describe all this yet though).
David J.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: