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

From Masahiko Sawada
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum
Date
Msg-id CAD21AoDDb3WLJA71UdVpkRhr3O9cdOOe2o8fbyOZ=cwsk0RGCw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum  (Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 1:35 PM Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 9:17 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you. Attached the rebased patch.
>
>
> I ran some performance tests to compare the parallelism benefits,

Thank you for testing!

> but I got some strange results of performance overhead, may be it is
> because, I tested it on my laptop.

Hmm, I think the parallel vacuum would help for heavy workloads like a
big table with multiple indexes. In your test result, all executions
are completed within 1 sec, which seems to be one use case that the
parallel vacuum wouldn't help. I suspect that the table is small,
right? Anyway I'll also do performance tests.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: pgbench MAX_ARGS
Next
From: Richard Guo
Date:
Subject: Re: NOT IN subquery optimization