Horton

Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2023-03-06T21:13:37Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 03:48:28PM -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 3:27 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 02:40:09PM -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
>> > I noticed in vacuum_rel() in vacuum.c where table_relation_vacuum() is
>> > called, 4211fbd84 changes the else into an else if [1]. I understand
>> > after reading the commit and re-reading the code why that is now, but I
>> > was initially confused. I was thinking it might be nice to have a
>> > comment mentioning why there is no else case here (i.e. that the main
>> > table relation will be vacuumed on the else if branch).
>>
>> This was a hack to avoid another level of indentation for that whole block
>> of code, but based on your comment, it might be better to just surround
>> this entire section with an "if (params->options & VACOPT_PROCESS_MAIN)"
>> check.  WDYT?
> 
> I think that would be clearer.

Here's a patch.  Thanks for reviewing.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

Commits

  1. Improve readability of code PROCESS_MAIN in vacuum_rel()

  2. Add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM

  3. Improve the regression tests of VACUUM (PROCESS_TOAST)

  4. Display the leader apply worker's PID for parallel apply workers.