Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]

Helllo!

> I don't really pay attention to pg_repack, but I do pay quite some attention
> to the pg_squeeze extension (which I wrote and maintain). I recall that some
> users were surprised by the amount of disk space consumed (as the earlier
> versions of pg_squeeze were "too lazy" about WAL decoding), but I do not
> recall a single complaint about pg_squeeze causing the XID wraparound
> situation.

For "finish" I mean get out of space (in other write-heavy tables) or high CPU usage (due to slow index scan checking the same rows again and again).

Also, you REPACK one table - and add a lot of bloat in others, in some cases with negative impact in total.

But yes, agree about pg_squeeze here - if it is usable with such a long transaction - REPACK CONCURRENTLY will be too.

Mikhail.