On Fri, 15 May 2026 at 10:36, Fujii Masao <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 9:46 PM Álvaro Herrera <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Thanks for the patch! It looks good to me. > > > Unless there are objections, I will commit it. > > > > Yeah, looks good to me, thanks. > > I've pushed the patch. Thanks! > > > Fine with me. I wouldn't have a problem saying it's a backpatchable > > bugfix, but it's certainly not very high priority or criticality. > > Agreed. > > > BTW, while testing REPACK boolean options, I found two other issues > in their parsing. > > First, REPACK (CONCURRENTLY OFF) failed with: > > ERROR: unrecognized REPACK option "concurrently" > > even though REPACK (CONCURRENTLY ON) works correctly. That is, > CONCURRENTLY was treated as an unrecognized option when disabled. > > Second, when the same option is specified multiple times, the last value > is not always honored. In particular, if any occurrence sets an option to ON, > the option remains enabled even when the final setting is OFF. > > I think these are bugs, and the attached patch fixes them. Thoughts?
I saw this just got committed. Is there a reason the option handling for this, VACUUM, and EXPLAIN aren't done in one place? Thom
