On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:12:34AM -0700, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Thank you for making the patch quickly! The patch looks good to me. A nitpick:
Thanks for reviewing. > + if (found && hentry->ar_hasrelopts) > + avopts = &hentry->ar_reloptions; > > ar_hasrelopts is always true here, since entries are only created when > extract_autovac_opts() returns non-NULL, so the second conjunct is > redundant actually. Having said that, it seems safer for future > changes and keeping it for symmetry with do_autovacuum() seems fine to > me. Yeah, this is about what I was thinking. > Do we want to have regression tests for it? FWIW no test exercises > pg_stat_get_autovacuum_scores(). The only reference in the tree is the > view definition in rules.out. That's presumably why this went > unnoticed. It might be worth adding a test or two for this view, but I doubt it would've caught this issue. IIRC I held off adding tests originally because I was worried about test stability. -- nathan
