Re: New vacuum option to do only freezing
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-06-19T05:39:23Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:43:19AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Thank you for comments. Attached updated version patch.
This is an open item present for quite some time, so I have looked at
the patch. The base patch is fine.
+INSERT INTO no_index_cleanup(i, t) VALUES(1, repeat('1234567890',30000));
Do we really need a string as long as that?
Is actually the existing set of tests that helpful? We now have only
two VACUUM queries which run on no_index_cleanup, both of them using
FULL so the reloption as well as the value of INDEX_CLEANUP are
ignored. Wouldn't it be better to redesign a bit the tests with more
combinations of options like that?
-- Toast inherit the value from the table
ALTER TABLE no_index_cleanup SET (vacuum_index_cleanup = false);
-- Value directly defined for both
ALTER TABLE no_index_cleanup SET (vacuum_index_cleanup = false,
toast.vacuum_index_cleanup = true);
ALTER TABLE no_index_cleanup SET (vacuum_index_cleanup = true,
toast.vacuum_index_cleanup = false);
It seems to me that we'd want tests to make sure that indexes are
actually cleaned up, where pageinspect could prove to be useful.
--
Michael
Commits
-
Add toast-level reloption for vacuum_index_cleanup
- ce59b75d449d 12.0 landed
-
heap_prepare_freeze_tuple: Simplify coding
- 2bf372a4ae26 12.0 landed
-
Fix missing word.
- 6665305e17ed 12.0 landed
-
Allow VACUUM to be run with index cleanup disabled.
- a96c41feec6b 12.0 landed
-
Don't mark pages all-visible spuriously
- d2599ecfcc74 11.0 cited