On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 18:47, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 12:53 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor
> <mahi6run@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > 1.
> > > > > > -P, --parallel=PARALLEL_DEGREE do parallel vacuum
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think, "do parallel vacuum" should be modified. Without specifying -P, we are still doing parallel vacuum
sowe can use like "degree for parallel vacuum"
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not sure if 'degree' makes it very clear. How about "use this
> > > > > many background workers for vacuum, if available"?
> > > >
> > > > If background workers are many, then automatically, we are using them(by default parallel vacuum). This option
isto put limit on background workers(limit for vacuum workers) to be used by vacuum process.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I don't think that the option is just to specify the max limit because
> > > that is generally controlled by guc parameters. This option allows
> > > users to specify the number of workers for the cases where he has more
> > > knowledge about the size/type of indexes. In some cases, the user
> > > might be able to make a better decision and that was the reason we
> > > have added this option in the first place.
> > >
> > > > So I think, we can use "max parallel vacuum workers (by default, based on no. of indexes)" or "control parallel
vacuumworkers"
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hmm, I feel what I suggested is better because of the above explanation.
> >
> > Agreed.
> >
>
> Okay, thanks for the review. Attached is an updated patch. I have
> additionally run pgindent. I am planning to commit the attached
> tomorrow unless I see more comments.
Thank you for committing it!
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
