| From: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | 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> |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel heap vacuum |
| Date: | 2025-02-25 22:44:11 |
| Message-ID: | CAAKRu_bk6KhwbiN+h7qJkiFaGFw_spr9iqm3bt1eRTS=FXe7rA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 5:14 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Given that we have only about one month until the feature freeze, I
> find that it's realistic to introduce either one parallelism for PG18
> and at least we might want to implement the one first that is more
> beneficial and helpful for users. Since we found that parallel phase
> III is not very efficient in many cases, I'm thinking that in terms of
> PG18 development, we might want to switch focus to parallel phase I,
> and then go for phase III if we have time.
Okay, well let me know how I can be helpful. Should I be reviewing a
version that is already posted?
- Melanie
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker | 2025-02-25 23:03:24 | Re: pg_trgm comparison bug on cross-architecture replication due to different char implementation |
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-02-25 22:33:27 | Re: Trigger more frequent autovacuums of heavy insert tables |