Re: Backpatch b61d161c14 (Introduce vacuum errcontext ...) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Backpatch b61d161c14 (Introduce vacuum errcontext ...)
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1J=fvjM4N+4E+zr-Naeo=UFv8Q4M1CNETtQphM8yXDedQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Backpatch b61d161c14 (Introduce vacuum errcontext ...)  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
Responses Re: Backpatch b61d161c14 (Introduce vacuum errcontext ...)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 7:25 AM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
>
>
> > I have done some testing with both the patches and would like to do
> > more unless there are objections with these.
>
> Comments:
>
> >         * The index name is saved only during this phase and restored immediately
>
> => I wouldn't say "only" since it's saved during lazy_vacuum: index AND cleanup.
>
> >update_vacuum_error_info(LVRelStats *errinfo, LVSavedErrInfo *oldpos, int phase,
>
> => You called your struct "LVSavedErrInfo" but the variables are still called
> "pos".  I would call it olderrinfo or just old.
>

Fixed both of the above comments. I used the variable name as saved_err_info.

> Also, this doesn't (re)rename the "cbarg" stuff that Alvaro didn't like, which
> was my 0001 patch.
>

If I am not missing anything then that change was in
lazy_cleanup_index and after this patch, it won't be required because
we are using a different variable name.

I have combined both the patches now.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Justin Pryzby
Date:
Subject: Re: Backpatch b61d161c14 (Introduce vacuum errcontext ...)
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Default setting for enable_hashagg_disk