| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz |
| Subject: | Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM |
| Date: | 2023-03-06 22:43:10 |
| Message-ID: | 20230306224310.GA3165453@nathanxps13 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 05:09:58PM -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> I would move this comment inside of the outer if statement since it is
> distinguishing between the two branches of the inner if statement.
Oops, done.
> Also, I would still consider putting a comment above that reminds us that
> VACOPT_PROCESS_MAIN is the default and will vacuum the main relation.
I tried adding something along these lines.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| process_main_readability_fix_v2.patch | text/x-diff | 1.8 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Melanie Plageman | 2023-03-06 23:12:36 | Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2023-03-06 22:29:50 | Re: Use pg_pwritev_with_retry() instead of write() in dir_open_for_write() to avoid partial writes? |