Re: parallel vacuum comments

On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 10:56 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 10:55 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 6:22 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 5:39 PM houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com
> > > <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2)
> > > > +#include "utils/rel.h"
> > > > +#include "utils/lsyscache.h"
> > > > +#include "utils/memutils.h"
> > > >
> > > > It might be better to keep the header file in alphabetical order.
> > > > :
> > > > +#include "utils/lsyscache.h"
> > > > +#include "utils/memutils.h"
> > > > +#include "utils/rel.h"
> > > >
> > >
> > > Right, I'll take care of this as I am already making some other edits
> > > in the patch.
> > >
> >
> > Fixed this and made a few other changes in the patch that includes (a)
> > passed down the num_index_scans information in parallel APIs based on
> > which it can make the decision whether to reinitialize DSM or consider
> > conditional parallel vacuum clean up; (b) get rid of first-time
> > variable in ParallelVacuumState as that is not required if we have
> > num_index_scans information; (c) there seems to be quite a few
> > unnecessary includes in vacuumparallel.c which I have removed; (d)
> > unnecessary error callback info was being set in ParallelVacuumState
> > in leader backend; (e) changed/added comments at quite a few places.
> >
> > Can you please once verify the changes in the attached?
>
> Thank you for updating the patch!
>
> I agreed with these changes and it looks good to me.
>

Pushed. As per my knowledge, we have addressed the improvements
raised/discussed in this thread.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.