On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 06:56:29PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> I deem it pretty unlikely that someone will accidentally remove the
> code that I just committed and a test to test that vacuumdb -Z
> --buffer-usage-limit ... passes the BUFFER_USAGE_LIMIT option would
> likely just forever mark that we once had a trivial bug that forgot to
> include the --buffer-usage-limit when -Z was specified.
Perhaps so.
> If others feel strongly that a test is worthwhile, then I'll reconsider.
I don't know if you would like that, but the addition is as simple as
the attached, FYI.
--
Michael