Re: Parallel heap vacuum

From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: 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: 2025-01-17 17:13:08
Message-ID: CAD21AoDiGZPU_s9pQ1freggrmdFC4=eYWybGqSTtZauB_yQiAw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 1:43 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 6:37 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 1:34 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> >
>
>
> IIRC, there was one of the blocker for implementing parallel heap vacuum was group locking, have we already resolved that issue or its being included in this patch set?

I recall we had some discussion on changes to group locking for
implementing parallel heap vacuum, but I don't remember if we have a
blocker now.

One problem we previously had was that since the relation extension
locks were not in conflict between parallel workers and the leader,
multiple workers could extend the visibility map simultaneously. This
problem was fixed by commit 85f6b49c2c.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2025-01-17 17:15:29 Re: [PATCH] Hex-coding optimizations using SVE on ARM.
Previous Message Oliver Ford 2025-01-17 16:43:29 Re: Add RESPECT/IGNORE NULLS and FROM FIRST/LAST options