Re: Emit fewer vacuum records by reaping removable tuples during pruning

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Date: 2024-01-09T05:56:34Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 03:50:47PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> Hmm, interesting. I haven't had time to study this fully today, but I
> think 0001 looks fine and could just be committed. Hooray for killing
> useless variables with dumb names.

I've been looking at 0001 a couple of weeks ago and thought that it
was fine because there's only one caller of lazy_scan_prune() and one
caller of lazy_scan_noprune() so all the code paths were covered.

+   /* rel truncation is unsafe */
+   if (hastup)
+       vacrel->nonempty_pages = blkno + 1;

Except for this comment that I found misleading because this is not
about the fact that truncation is unsafe, it's about correctly
tracking the the last block where we have tuples to ensure a correct
truncation.  Perhaps this could just reuse "Remember the location of 
the last page with nonremovable tuples"?  If people object to that,
feel free.
--
Michael

Commits

  1. Combine FSM updates for prune and no-prune cases.

  2. Remove LVPagePruneState.

  3. Move VM update code from lazy_scan_heap() to lazy_scan_prune().

  4. Optimize vacuuming of relations with no indexes.

  5. Be more consistent about whether to update the FSM while vacuuming.

  6. Remove hastup from LVPagePruneState.

  7. Use scanned_pages to decide when to failsafe check.

  8. Simplify lazy_scan_heap's handling of scanned pages.

  9. While vacuuming a large table, update upper-level FSM data every so often.