Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]

On 2026-Mar-27, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> 0001 is looking good.  I don't commit it just yet because there's no
> point in doing so until 0003 is also committable.
> 
> 0002 continues to baffle me.  I would much rather do without it.
> 
> 0003 is the addition of CONCURRENTLY and all it needs.  Regarding
> structure, I think it's good to have the code that runs in a separate
> worker have its own file, which I named commands/repack_worker.c.
> Luckily it's all well contained.  It shares data structures and whatnot
> with the other parts of REPACK via include/commands/repack_internal.h.

I figured out that the right way to handle SET_VARSIZE() problem was to
use a union, giving sufficient space so that the compiler doesn't
complain.  So I got rid of 0002 here.  There are no other interesting
changes in this version compared to v45, and I didn't get around to
squashing anything.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/