RE: parallel vacuum comments

On Thur, Dec 2, 2021 8:31 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I've attached updated patches.
>
> The first patch is the main patch for refactoring parallel vacuum code; removes
> bitmap-related code and renames function names for consistency. The second
> patch moves these parallel-related codes to vacuumparallel.c as well as
> common functions that are used by both lazyvacuum.c and vacuumparallel.c to
> vacuum.c. The third patch adds regression tests for parallel vacuum on
> different kinds of indexes with multiple index scans. Please review them.

Thanks for updating the patch.
I reviewed the 0001 patch and didn’t find some big issues in the patch.

I only have a personally suggestion for the following function name:

parallel_vacuum_process_unsafe_indexes
parallel_vacuum_index_is_parallel_safe

It seems not only "unsafe" index are processed in the above functions,
but also index which is unsuitable(based on parallel_vacuum_should_skip_index).
So, it might be clear to avoid "unsafe" in the name. Maybe we can use: "xxin_leader"
or " can_participate".

Best regards,
Hou zj