| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Mahendra Singh Thalor <mahi6run(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, tushar <tushar(dot)ahuja(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Vacuum o/p with (full 1, parallel 0) option throwing an error |
| Date: | 2020-04-13 09:24:53 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+o5V9_mGyLAcFvkFA0ZMjzwXk8JM89xfFSwjaVmO97zA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 7:05 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> No problem. I think I was trying to make my text similar to that from
> 14a4f6f37.
>
> I realized that I didn't sq!uash my last patch, so it didn't include the
> functional change (which is maybe what Robert was referring to).
>
I think it is better to add a new test for temporary table which has
less data. We don't want to increase test timings to test the
combination of options. I changed that in the attached patch. I will
commit this tomorrow unless you or anyone else has any more comments.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v4-0001-Fix-the-usage-of-parallel-and-full-options-of-vacuum.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2020-04-13 09:52:06 | Re: doc review for parallel vacuum |
| Previous Message | Richard Guo | 2020-04-13 09:07:41 | Re: weird hash plan cost, starting with pg10 |