On 2026-Mar-12, Robert Treat wrote: > ISTM the user facing docs refer to cluster as an "obsolete" variant / > spelling, rather than something marked as deprecated. This feels like > it is meant to imply that the old functionality is not planned for > removal in some future release (ie. deprecated), but that you may find > that certain bits of support for it are already removed/broken. If > that was the intention, I guess it gives justification to remove it > now; that said it does seem rather unfriendly to not give any kind of > bridge release to get from one side to the other, so I think the ideal > would be to keep it for v19 and remove it in v20.
Yeah, I think "obsolete" rather than "deprecated" is correct, because I don't see us removing either CLUSTER or VACUUM FULL. On the other hand, if you use pg_stat_progress_cluster while running REPACK CONCURRENTLY, then the resulting report might not fully make sense. But I agree it makes sense to keep the view in place until ... some later release. (Maybe v20, but also maybe a little later wouldn't hurt.) -- Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "On the other flipper, one wrong move and we're Fatal Exceptions" (T.U.X.: Term Unit X - http://www.thelinuxreview.com/TUX/)
