| From: | Svetlana Derevyanko <s(dot)derevyanko(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add Index-level REINDEX with multiple jobs |
| Date: | 2024-03-11 08:38:40 |
| Message-ID: | 8a65e78b9bb1871ca4508cbf190dfeb4@postgrespro.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrey M. Borodin писал(а) 2024-03-04 09:26:
>> On 6 Feb 2024, at 11:21, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>>
>> The problem may be actually trickier than that, no? Could there be
>> other factors to take into account for their classification, like
>> their sizes (typically, we'd want to process the biggest one first, I
>> guess)?
>
> Maxim, what do you think about it?
>
>
> Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
I agree that, as is the case with tables in REINDEX SCHEME, indices
should be sorted accordingly to their size.
Attaching the second version of patch, with indices being sorted by
size.
Best regards,
Svetlana Derevyanko
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v2-0001-Add-Index-level-REINDEX-with-multiple-jobs.patch | text/x-diff | 8.9 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2024-03-11 08:50:33 | Re: Statistics Import and Export |
| Previous Message | Jelte Fennema-Nio | 2024-03-11 08:33:48 | Re: Reducing the log spam |