| From: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel heap vacuum |
| Date: | 2025-04-04 18:05:00 |
| Message-ID: | CAAKRu_a-NY=g1LBrAFy++PbpMan3Q5LQA=WSdZZ=pi-Dd3uSXA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 5:30 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> I've attached the new version patch. There are no major changes; I
> fixed some typos, improved the comment, and removed duplicated codes.
> Also, I've updated the commit messages.
I haven't looked closely at this version but I did notice that you do
not document that parallel vacuum disables eager scanning. Imagine you
are a user who has set the eager freeze related table storage option
(vacuum_max_eager_freeze_failure_rate) and you schedule a regular
parallel vacuum. Now that table storage option does nothing.
- Melanie
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Euler Taveira | 2025-04-04 18:21:41 | Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY? |
| Previous Message | Alena Rybakina | 2025-04-04 17:44:49 | Re: Adding skip scan (including MDAM style range skip scan) to nbtree |