Re: vacuum_truncate configuration parameter and isset_offset

On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 09:40:24AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> So, given the precedent of vacuum_index_cleanup and the above, we should
> turn this into an enum that accepts all existing boolean literal inputs and
> also has a undocumented "unset" default value that the user is not allowed
> to explicitly set but instead only gets used to resolve an unset reloption
> at runtime.

This would involve adding a field to relopt_enum_elt_def to declare a value
as "unsettable," right?  That seems feasible, but IMHO it's comparable to
adding a field to reopt_parse_elt.

-- 
nathan