Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM
Date
Msg-id 20230301180953.b64tekcnh43xtzqn@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM  (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>)
Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2023-Mar-01, Michael Paquier wrote:

> +-- PROCESS_MAIN option
> +VACUUM (PROCESS_MAIN FALSE) vactst;
> +VACUUM (PROCESS_MAIN FALSE, PROCESS_TOAST FALSE) vactst;
> +VACUUM (PROCESS_MAIN FALSE, FULL) vactst;
> 
> Thinking a bit here.  This set of tests does not make sure that the
> main relation and/or the toast relation have been actually processed. 
> pg_stat_user_tables does not track what's happening on the toast
> relations.  So...  What about adding some tests in 100_vacuumdb.pl
> that rely on vacuumdb --verbose and check the logs produced?  We
> should make sure that the toast or the main relation are processed,
> by tracking, for example, logs like vacuuming "schema.table".  When
> FULL is involved, we may want to track the changes on relfilenodes
> depending on what's wanted.

Maybe instead of reading the log, read values from pg_stat_all_tables.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Uno puede defenderse de los ataques; contra los elogios se esta indefenso"



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
Date:
Subject: Re: Memory leak from ExecutorState context?
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: Non-superuser subscription owners