On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 10:31 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 10:27 AM Melanie Plageman
> wrote:
> > Attached what I plan to push shortly.
>
> Looks good to me.
Thanks! pushed.
On Sun, Jun 1, 2025 at 2:23 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> I have to imagine that you moved rel_pages initialization back so that
> it took place next to the initialization of other, similar BlockNumber
> fields from LVRelState. IIRC I wrote a comment about this issue at
> least in part because I u
On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 10:27 AM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
> Attached what I plan to push shortly.
Looks good to me.
--
Peter Geoghegan
On Sun, Jun 1, 2025 at 1:51 PM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
> Thanks for the report. That was a dumb mistake. There was no reason
> for me to move the line up as you can see in the diff -- it must have
> been unintentional.
I have to imagine that you moved rel_pages initialization back so that
it took
On Sun, Jun 1, 2025 at 12:07 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> Commit 052026c9b9 made heap_vacuum_rel call RelationGetNumberOfBlocks
> before it calls vacuum_get_cutoffs -- it swapped the order. This is
> wrong, as explained by an intact comment above the call to
> vacuum_get_cutoffs.
>
> In short, th
