| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kirill Bychik <kirill(dot)bychik(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: WAL usage calculation patch |
| Date: | 2020-03-28 10:44:04 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+nLPguL+a1JStyx+L9xh0X3nQ3tXptorsggT6dn9oPLQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 12:54 AM Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 8:21 PM Kirill Bychik <kirill(dot)bychik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > All these are really valuable objections. Unfortunately, I won't be
> > able to get all sorted out soon, due to total lack of time. I would be
> > very glad if somebody could step in for this patch.
>
> I'll try to do that tomorrow!
>
I see some basic problems with the patch. The way it tries to compute
WAL usage for parallel stuff doesn't seem right to me. Can you share
or point me to any test done where we have computed WAL for parallel
operations like Parallel Vacuum or Parallel Create Index? Basically,
I don't know changes done in ExecInitParallelPlan and friends allow us
to compute WAL for parallel operations. Those will primarily cover
parallel queries that won't write WAL. How you have tested those
changes?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ranier Vilela | 2020-03-28 10:48:22 | Re: Possible copy and past error? (\usr\backend\commands\analyze.c) |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2020-03-28 10:23:11 | Re: doc: vacuum full, fillfactor, and "extra space" |