On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 07:24:28PM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> I renamed.
Hmm. I have found what was partially itching me for patch 0002, and
that's actually the fact that we don't do the error reporting for heap
within lazy_vacuum_heap() because the code relies too much on updating
two progress parameters at the same time, on top of the fact that you
are mixing multiple concepts with this refactoring. One problem is
that if this code is refactored in the future, future callers of
lazy_vacuum_heap() would miss the update of the progress reporting.
Splitting things improves also the readability of the code, so
attached is the refactoring I would do for this portion of the set.
It is also more natural to increment num_index_scans when the
reporting happens on consistency grounds.
(Please note that I have not indented yet the patch.)
--
Michael
