From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Subject: | Re: parallel vacuum comments |
Date: | 2021-12-13 06:12:14 |
Message-ID: | CAD21AoDYr7dbBocBHiZab=6QZNUeZ+s5ZCAA+RXQEYxB6xL6bw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 2:09 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 10:33 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 9:08 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 6:05 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 7:44 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Agreed with the above two points.
> > > >
> > > > I've attached updated patches that incorporated the above comments
> > > > too. Please review them.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I have made the following minor changes to the 0001 patch: (a) An
> > > assert was removed from dead_items_max_items() which I added back. (b)
> > > Removed an unnecessary semicolon from one of the statements in
> > > compute_parallel_vacuum_workers(). (c) Changed comments at a few
> > > places. (d) moved all parallel_vacuum_* related functions together.
> > > (e) ran pgindent and slightly modify the commit message.
> > >
> > > Let me know what you think of the attached?
> >
> > Thank you for updating the patch!
> >
> > The patch also moves some functions, e.g., update_index_statistics()
> > is moved without code changes. I agree to move functions for
> > consistency but that makes the review hard and the patch complicated.
> > I think it's better to do improving the parallel vacuum code and
> > moving functions in separate patches.
> >
>
> Okay, I thought it might be better to keep all parallel_vacuum_*
> related functions together but we can keep that in a separate patch
> Feel free to submit without those changes.
I've attached the patch. I've just moved some functions back but not
done other changes.
> In fact, if we go for your
> current 0002 then that might not be even required as we move all those
> functions to a new file.
Right. So it seems not necessary.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v9-0001-Improve-parallel-vacuum-implementation.patch | application/octet-stream | 36.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2021-12-13 07:30:36 | Re: Assertion failure with replication origins and PREPARE TRANSACTIOn |
Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2021-12-13 06:00:46 | Re: Add client connection check during the execution of the query |