On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 9:42 AM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 8:44 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 7:12 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> > <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 3:30 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > During recent developments in the vacuum, it has been noticed [1] that
> > > > parallel vacuum workers don't use any buffer access strategy. I think
> > > > we can fix it either by propagating the required information from the
> > > > leader or just get the access strategy in each worker separately. The
> > > > patches for both approaches for PG-13 are attached.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > [1] -
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAH2-Wz%3Dgf6FXW-jPVRdeCZk0QjhduCqH_XD3QbES9wPmhircuA%40mail.gmail.com
> > >
> > > Note: I have not followed the original discussion in [1].
> > >
> > > My understanding of the approach #1 i.e. propagating the vacuum
> > > strategy down to the parallel vacuum workers from the leader is that
> > > the same ring buffer (of 256KB for vacuum) will be used by both leader
> > > and all the workers.
> > >
> >
> > No that is not the intention, each worker will use its ring buffer.
> > The first approach just passes the relevant information to workers so
> > that they can use the same strategy as used by the leader but both
> > will use separate ring buffer.
>
> Thanks for the clarification. I understood now.
>
> On the patch fix_access_strategy_workers_11.patch: can we have the
> more descriptive comment like "/* Each parallel VACUUM worker gets its
> own access strategy */" that's introduced by commit f6b8f19 instead of
> just saying "/* Set up vacuum access strategy */" which is quite
> obvious from the function name GetAccessStrategy?
>
Yeah, I will change that before commit unless there are more suggestions.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
