On Sat, Jul 4, 2026 at 2:41 PM Andrey Borodin <[email protected]> wrote: > > A dedicated test would be nice but is difficult here: on-access VM-setting is > nondeterministic (see the enum/plancache flakiness earlier), and even a TAP > test with autovacuum off + forced horizon advancement would likely be > unstable on the buildfarm - so it might even be net negative.
Yea, I couldn't come up with a test that would behave. > One comment nit: the reserve behavior is preserved (we skip the FSM update > unless the page became newly_all_visible), but the outer comment explaining > *why* we don't update the FSM in the common case is gone; the rationale now > survives only as a parenthetical inside the `if (presult.newly_all_visible)` > block. A one-line note at the point where we *skip* the update would spare a > future reader from wondering why it isn't unconditional. I massaged the comments a bit. I originally omitted the other comment because I was suspicious of it (see Andres' complaint about the comment upthread). But I think I captured the part of it that we want to preserve in my revised comments. > Thanks for working on this! Thanks for taking a look! - Melanie
