Re: REPACK and naming - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: REPACK and naming
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwbqXLogKbUPiHN9h88FEVP-Oem-tv5n3CyKoGCzpNM1gA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: REPACK and naming  (Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 3:55 PM Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
On 2025-Sep-17, David G. Johnston wrote:

> On Wednesday, September 17, 2025, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 18 Sept 2025 at 01:09, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > RETABLE just isn't a word. The code sometimes calls this a REWRITE of
> > > a table, which would be reasonable.
> >
> > +1. I was reading this yesterday wondering why "REWRITE" didn't get a
> > mention.
>

I'm not particularly excited about REWRITE, as it sounds a little bit
too generic, plus we already have the "query rewriter" which rewrites,
and I think it would be good that we stop overloading terms for
completely different things.

Agreed


> Rebuild has some prior art apparently, which makes it appealing.

Can you cite that?  I've seen "ALTER TABLE/INDEX REBUILD", but not
REBUILD as a standalone command.


I was just skimming the list Mikhail provided.


It isn't standalone but the keyword REBUILD gets used versus our unlisted use of REPACK.

But there isn't enough consistency/similarity for me to want to avoid repack altogether.

David J.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Álvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: REPACK and naming
Next
From: Chao Li
Date:
Subject: Re: Invalid primary_slot_name triggers warnings in all processes on reload