Re: Periodic FSM vacuum doesn't happen in one-pass strategy vacuum.
Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
To: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Date: 2025-06-30T13:41:56Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 10:20 PM Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 6:59 PM Melanie Plageman > <melanieplageman@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > So, I think we should commit the fix you proposed. > > > > The only question I have left is implementation: should we have > > ndeleted as an output parameter of lazy_scan_prune() or have > > lazy_scan_prune() return it (instead of void)? > > > > In <= 16, heap_page_prune() returned the number of tuples deleted, so > > I thought of maybe having lazy_scan_prune() do this. Though, maybe it > > is confusing to have one result returned as the return value and the > > others returned in output parameters unless there is something more > > special about ndeleted. With heap_page_prune(), I think it was the > > return value because that was kind of what heap_page_prune() > > "accomplished". > > Hi Sawada-san, > > Just checking what you thought about this. We probably want to get > this committed and backported relatively soon. I'm happy to help with > that if needed but just want to make sure we are on the same page > about the fix. > Sorry for the late response, I was unable to work on this last week. I'll check your reply and the solution tomorrow, and will get back to you with my thoughts. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Commits
-
Fix missing FSM vacuum opportunities on tables without indexes.
- 3811ca3600a3 19 (unreleased) landed
- 7c6ededac82b 18.0 landed
- 792238c8b4a1 17.6 landed
-
Optimize vacuuming of relations with no indexes.
- c120550edb86 17.0 cited