Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1L-LeEok04tnyEadJqTz_NUGae7SzWXsiBakkk_jiiRAw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum
Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:51 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 11:39 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have performed cost delay testing on the latest test(I have used
> same script as attahced in [1] and [2].
> vacuum_cost_delay = 10
> vacuum_cost_limit = 2000
>
> Observation: As we have concluded earlier, the delay time is in sync
> with the I/O performed by the worker
> and the total delay (heap + index) is almost the same as the
> non-parallel operation.
>

Thanks for doing this test again.  In the attached patch, I have
addressed all the comments and modified a few comments.

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

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Yugo NAGATA
Date:
Subject: Re: Incremental View Maintenance: ERROR: out of shared memory
Next
From: Eugen Konkov
Date:
Subject: Re: Does 'instead of delete' trigger support modification of OLD