On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 3:37 PM Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2025-02-26 at 15:15 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > > I strongly agree. I think shipping this feature in any form that uses > > in-place updates is a bad idea. > > Removed already in commit f3dae2ae58.
Cool. > The reason they were added was mostly for consistency with ANALYZE, and > (at least for me) secondarily about churn on pg_class. The bloat was > never terrible. > > With that in mind, should we remove the in-place updates from ANALYZE > as well? While I generally think fewer in-place updates are better than more, I'm not sure what code we're talking about here and I definitely haven't studied it, so I don't want to make excessively strong statements. If you feel it can be done without breaking anything else, or you have a way to repair the breakage, I'd definitely be interested in hearing more about that. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
