RE: parallel vacuum comments

On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 9:55 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 6:22 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 5:39 PM houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com
> > <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > 2)
> > > +#include "utils/rel.h"
> > > +#include "utils/lsyscache.h"
> > > +#include "utils/memutils.h"
> > >
> > > It might be better to keep the header file in alphabetical order.
> > > :
> > > +#include "utils/lsyscache.h"
> > > +#include "utils/memutils.h"
> > > +#include "utils/rel.h"
> > >
> >
> > Right, I'll take care of this as I am already making some other edits
> > in the patch.
> >
> 
> Fixed this and made a few other changes in the patch that includes (a) passed
> down the num_index_scans information in parallel APIs based on which it can
> make the decision whether to reinitialize DSM or consider conditional parallel
> vacuum clean up; (b) get rid of first-time variable in ParallelVacuumState as that
> is not required if we have num_index_scans information; (c) there seems to be
> quite a few unnecessary includes in vacuumparallel.c which I have removed; (d)
> unnecessary error callback info was being set in ParallelVacuumState in leader
> backend; (e) changed/added comments at quite a few places.
> 
> Can you please once verify the changes in the attached?

The changes look ok to me.
I tested the patch for multi-pass parallel vacuum cases and ran 'make check-world',
all the tests passed

Best regards,
Hou zj