Re: parallel vacuum comments
Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
To: "houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Date: 2021-11-16T05:53:18Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- parallel_vacuum_refactor_v3.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v3
On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 11:38 AM houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > On Thur, Nov 11, 2021 10:41 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote: > > I've attached a draft patch that refactors parallel vacuum and separates > > parallel-vacuum-related code to new file vacuumparallel.c. > > After discussion, I'll divide the patch into logical chunks. > > Hi. > > I noticed few minor issues in the patch. > > 1) > + /* > + * Parallel unsafe indexes can be processed only by leader (these are > + * processed in lazy_serial_process_indexes() by leader. > + */ > > It seems the function name in the comments should be serial_vacuum_unsafe_indexes > > 2) > + stats->parallel_workers_can_process = > + index_parallel_vacuum_is_safe(pvc->indrels[i], > + pvc->num_index_scans, > + bulkdel); > > The function index_parallel_vacuum_is_safe also return false for the > index < min_parallel_index_scan_size cutoff which seems parallel safe. So, > maybe we can rename the function to xxx_worker_can_process() ? Thank you for the comments! I've incorporated these comments and attached an updated patch. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/
Commits
-
Move parallel vacuum code to vacuumparallel.c.
- 8e1fae193864 15.0 landed
-
Move index vacuum routines to vacuum.c.
- cc8b25712b5e 15.0 landed
-
Improve parallel vacuum implementation.
- 22bd3cbe0c28 15.0 landed
-
Fix parallel amvacuumcleanup safety bug.
- c59278a1aa5e 15.0 landed
- f6162c020c88 14.1 landed
-
Simplify state managed by VACUUM.
- b4af70cb2103 14.0 cited