| From: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL 13 Beta 1 Release Announcement Draft |
| Date: | 2020-05-20 23:47:44 |
| Message-ID: | f83748bd-b411-562e-2f6c-bf0c7ba15619@aklaver.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On 5/20/20 4:30 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Hello, sorry for the timing on this, but here's some feedback.
>
> On 2020-May-20, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>
>
>> One of the most anticipated features of PostgreSQL 13 is the ability for the
>> `VACUUM` command to process indexes in parallel. This functionality can be
>> accessed using the new `PARALLEL` option on the `VACUUM` command (or
>> `--parallel` on `vacuumdb`), which allows you to specify the number of parallel
>> workers to use for vacuuming indexes. Note that this does not work with the
>> `FULL` option.
>
> I feel this "Note" is unnecessary; VACUUM FULL is of fringe use anyway.
You would hope so, but given the number of times it shows up on
--general I would say the note is important.
> The phrase on incremental sorting above is better use of these extra
> words, if you have a surplus.
>
> Thanks!
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2020-05-21 02:06:42 | Re: PostgreSQL 13 Beta 1 Release Announcement Draft |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-05-20 23:43:31 | Re: PostgreSQL 13 Beta 1 Release Announcement Draft |