Hi, On 2020-03-25 11:05:21 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > Since we talked about how scale_factor can be used to effectively disable this > new feature, I thought that scale=100 was too small and suggesed 1e10 (same as > max for vacuum_cleanup_index_scale_factor since 4d54543ef). That should allow > handling the case that analyze is disabled, or its threshold is high, or it > hasn't run yet, or it's running but hasn't finished, or analyze is triggered > as > same time as vacuum.
For disabling we instead should allow -1, and disable the feature if set to < 0. Greetings, Andres Freund
