Re: parallel vacuum comments

On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 11:38 AM houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com
<houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thur, Nov 11, 2021 10:41 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I've attached a draft patch that refactors parallel vacuum and separates
> > parallel-vacuum-related code to new file vacuumparallel.c.
> > After discussion, I'll divide the patch into logical chunks.
>
> Hi.
>
> I noticed few minor issues in the patch.
>
> 1)
> + /*
> + * Parallel unsafe indexes can be processed only by leader (these are
> + * processed in lazy_serial_process_indexes() by leader.
> + */
>
> It seems the function name in the comments should be serial_vacuum_unsafe_indexes
>
> 2)
> + stats->parallel_workers_can_process =
> + index_parallel_vacuum_is_safe(pvc->indrels[i],
> + pvc->num_index_scans,
> + bulkdel);
>
> The function index_parallel_vacuum_is_safe also return false for the
> index < min_parallel_index_scan_size cutoff which seems parallel safe. So,
> maybe we can rename the function to xxx_worker_can_process() ?

Thank you for the comments!

I've incorporated these comments and attached an updated patch.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/