Re: POC: Parallel processing of indexes in autovacuum
Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
To: Daniil Davydov <3danissimo@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>, SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM <satyanarlapuram@gmail.com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>,
Sami Imseih <samimseih@gmail.com>, Matheus Alcantara <matheusssilv97@gmail.com>,
Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2026-04-04T01:11:58Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- v37-0001-Allow-autovacuum-to-use-parallel-vacuum-workers.patch (text/x-patch) patch v37-0001
On Fri, Apr 3, 2026 at 6:45 AM Daniil Davydov <3danissimo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2026 at 6:00 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 2, 2026 at 8:10 AM Daniil Davydov <3danissimo@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I think we should add some cleanup for autovacuum near the ParallelContext
> > > cleanup, since they are interconnected. I also want to return our tests that
> > > are triggering ERROR/PANIC in the leader worker in order to check whether all
> > > resources are released. I hope I will be able to get to that by tomorrow
> > > evening.
> >
> > I think that the beginning of vacuum loop (in PG_TRY() block in
> > vacuum()) seems better place as we're resetting vacuum delay
> > parameters:
> >
> > in_vacuum = true;
> > VacuumFailsafeActive = false;
> > VacuumUpdateCosts();
> > VacuumCostBalance = 0;
> > VacuumCostBalanceLocal = 0;
> > VacuumSharedCostBalance = NULL;
> > VacuumActiveNWorkers = NULL;
> >
>
> I am still thinking that this pointer is related to the ParallelContext, and it
> is a bit confusing that we can manipulate it outside all "parallel" logic.
> Since this variable points to the DSM it looks very natural for me if its
> lifetime will be similar to the DSM. Please, see attached patch, that resets
> this pointer during dsm detaching.
Sounds a reasonable apporach.
Regarding the regression tests, ISTM we no longer need
'autovacuum-leader-before-indexes-processing' injection point since it
currently tests that parallel workers update their delay parameters
during the initialization (i.e., in parallel_vacuum_main()). In order
to verify the behavior of workers updating their delay parameters
while processing indexes, we would need another injection ponit to
stop parallel workers, which seems overkill to me. So I removed it but
the test still covers the propagation logic.
Regarding the patch, I don't think it's a good idea to include
bgworker_internals.h from reloptions.c:
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
#include "commands/defrem.h"
#include "commands/tablespace.h"
#include "nodes/makefuncs.h"
+#include "postmaster/bgworker_internals.h"
#include "storage/lock.h"
#include "utils/array.h"
#include "utils/attoptcache.h"
@@ -236,6 +237,15 @@ static relopt_int intRelOpts[] =
},
SPGIST_DEFAULT_FILLFACTOR, SPGIST_MIN_FILLFACTOR, 100
},
+ {
+ {
+ "autovacuum_parallel_workers",
+ "Maximum number of parallel autovacuum workers that can be
used for processing this table.",
+ RELOPT_KIND_HEAP,
+ ShareUpdateExclusiveLock
+ },
+ -1, -1, MAX_PARALLEL_WORKER_LIMIT
+ },
I'd leave the maximum value as 1024.
I've attached patch and please check it. I think it's a good shape and
I'm going to push it next Monday barrying objections.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Allow autovacuum to use parallel vacuum workers.
- 1ff3180ca016 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Add parallel vacuum worker usage to VACUUM (VERBOSE) and autovacuum logs.
- adcdbe93860b 19 (unreleased) landed
-
doc: Put new options in consistent order on man pages
- bc35adee8d7a 18.0 cited