Hi,
On Fri, Sep 25, 2026 at 5:32 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> And it happens only when the number of workers sharing the cost limit
> changes. So I agree that it's acceptable, and given we're close to
> RC1, I'm fine with the SetLatch() approach.
>
> As for the 0001 patch, it looks good to me. I have one minor comment,
> though it's a matter of personal preference:
Thanks for reviewing it.
> +void
> +parallel_vacuum_refresh_cost_params(void)
>
> The second paragraph explains how this function is called. Since what
> the function does, as well as its name, is not specific to that wait,
> I guess it's better to explain it on the caller side, and the comment
> newly added in WaitForParallelWorkersToFinish() already explains a
> similar thing. Then the function comment can focus on what the
> function does and its side effects, such as reloading the
> configuration file. For example:
>
> /*
> * Reload the configuration file if requested, and refresh the cost-based
> * delay parameters of an autovacuum worker running a parallel vacuum
> * (leader), propagating any change to its parallel workers.
> */
Agreed.
Please find the attached v4 patches. 0002 remains the same.
--
Bharath Rupireddy
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
