ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
> I tested this changes and found two issues:
>
> 1. fillfactor.* options are silently ignored when the table doesn't have
> toast relation. Should we notice the behabior to users?
> ex. NOTICE: toast storage parameters are ignored
> because the table doesn't have toast relations.
You mean "toast.* options"? If so, yes, they are silently ignored.
Maybe issuing a warning is not a bad idea. Care to propose a patch?
> 2. psql's \d+ doesn't show toast storage parameters.
>
> Neither \d+ for base tables nor toast relations show toast.* parameters
> though there are some values in pg_class.reloptions.
Yeah, this is a bug in psql. I neglected to update \d+ when I committed
the namespace patch. I'll investigate.