On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 03:50:47PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > Hmm, interesting. I haven't had time to study this fully today, but I > think 0001 looks fine and could just be committed. Hooray for killing > useless variables with dumb names.
I've been looking at 0001 a couple of weeks ago and thought that it was fine because there's only one caller of lazy_scan_prune() and one caller of lazy_scan_noprune() so all the code paths were covered. + /* rel truncation is unsafe */ + if (hastup) + vacrel->nonempty_pages = blkno + 1; Except for this comment that I found misleading because this is not about the fact that truncation is unsafe, it's about correctly tracking the the last block where we have tuples to ensure a correct truncation. Perhaps this could just reuse "Remember the location of the last page with nonremovable tuples"? If people object to that, feel free. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
