Hi, On 2023-02-27 23:11:53 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > As far as I know there are not such GUC parameters in the core but > there might be in third-party table AM and index AM extensions.
We already reload in a pretty broad range of situations, so I'm not sure there's a lot that could be unsafe that isn't already. > Also, I'm concerned that allowing to change any GUC parameters during > vacuum/analyze could be a foot-gun in the future. When modifying > vacuum/analyze-related codes, we have to consider the case where any GUC > parameters could be changed during vacuum/analyze. What kind of scenario are you thinking of? > I guess it would be better to apply the parameter changes for only vacuum > delay related parameters. For example, autovacuum launcher advertises the > values of the vacuum delay parameters on the shared memory not only for > autovacuum processes but also for manual vacuum/analyze processes. Both > processes can update them accordingly in vacuum_delay_point(). I don't think this is a good idea. It'd introduce a fair amount of complexity without, as far as I can tell, a benefit. Greetings, Andres Freund
