Re: error context for vacuum to include block number

From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: error context for vacuum to include block number
Date: 2019-12-15 16:27:12
Message-ID: 20191215162712.GZ2082@telsasoft.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 10:07:08PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 04:47:35PM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > It's related code which I cleaned up before adding new stuff. Not essential,
> > thus separate (0002 should be backpatched).
>
> The issue just causes some extra work and that's not a bug, so applied
> without a backpatch.

Thanks

> For 0003, I think that lazy_vacuum_heap_index() can be confusing as
> those indexes are unrelated to heap. Why not naming it just
> lazy_vacuum_all_indexes()? The routine should also have a header
> describing it.

I named it so because it calls both lazy_vacuum_index
("PROGRESS_VACUUM_PHASE_VACUUM_INDEX") and
lazy_vacuum_heap("PROGRESS_VACUUM_PHASE_VACUUM_HEAP")

I suppose you don't think the other way around is better?
lazy_vacuum_index_heap

Justin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Zubiri 2019-12-15 18:11:18 Improvement to psql's connection defaults
Previous Message Utsav Parmar 2019-12-15 16:26:32 Request to be allotted a project or a feature in pipeline