RE: parallel vacuum comments - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com
Subject RE: parallel vacuum comments
Date
Msg-id OS0PR01MB5716C876CA90EF85A160879294679@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: parallel vacuum comments  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: parallel vacuum comments
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 11:38 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Maybe we can start with using parallel_vacuum_*. We can change them
> later if there is an argument.
> 
> I've attached an updated patch. I don't update the terminology in
> vacuum that we're discussing on another thread[1].

Hi,

I noticed the patch no longer applies on the latest source.

And few comments.
1)
+static void set_parallel_vacuum_index_status(ParallelVacuumState *pvs,
+                                             bool bulkdel,
+                                             int num_index_scans);
+static void parallel_vacuum_all_indexes(ParallelVacuumState *pvs, bool bulkdel,
+                                        int num_index_scans);
...
+static bool index_can_participate_parallel_vacuum(Relation indrel,
+                                                  int num_index_scans);

Maybe the parameter num_index_scans can be replaced by a bool flag since it is
only used in the check "num_index_scans > 0" and "num_index_scans == 0".

2)
+        /* Reinitialize the parallel context to relaunch parallel workers */
+        if (!pvs->first_time)

It seems the ParallelVacuumState::first_time was not initialized before ?

Best regards
Hou zj

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: row filtering for logical replication
Next
From: Sasasu
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] buffile: ensure start offset is aligned with BLCKSZ