Re: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb
Date
Msg-id 20190129050830.GE3121@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb  ("Jamison, Kirk" <k.jamison@jp.fujitsu.com>)
Responses Re: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb  (Jesper Pedersen <jesper.pedersen@redhat.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:35:30AM +0000, Jamison, Kirk wrote:
> I just checked the patch.
> As per advice, you removed the versioning and specified --jobs.
> The patch still applies, builds and passed the tests successfully.

I would document the optional VACUUM_OPTS on the page of pg_upgrade.
If Peter thinks it is fine to not do so, that's fine for me as well.

It seems to me that the latest patch sent is incorrect for multiple
reasons:
1) You still enforce -j to use the number of jobs that the caller of
pg_upgrade provides, and we agreed that both things are separate
concepts upthread, no?  What has been suggested by Alvaro is to add a
comment so as one can use VACUUM_OPTS with -j optionally, instead of
suggesting a full-fledged vacuumdb command which depends on what
pg_upgrade uses.  So there is no actual need for the if/else
complication business.
2) Perhaps we need to worry about the second vacuumdb --all command,
which may want custom options, which are not necessarily the same as
the options of the first command?  I don't think we need to care as it
applies only to an upgraded cluster using something older 8.4, just
wondering..
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Built-in connection pooler