ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote: > I tested this changes and found two issues: > > 1. fillfactor.* options are silently ignored when the table doesn't have > toast relation. Should we notice the behabior to users? > ex. NOTICE: toast storage parameters are ignored > because the table doesn't have toast relations.
You mean "toast.* options"? If so, yes, they are silently ignored. Maybe issuing a warning is not a bad idea. Care to propose a patch? > 2. psql's \d+ doesn't show toast storage parameters. > > Neither \d+ for base tables nor toast relations show toast.* parameters > though there are some values in pg_class.reloptions. Yeah, this is a bug in psql. I neglected to update \d+ when I committed the namespace patch. I'll investigate. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
