On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 12:04:28AM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> In the case of the patch being proposed by Bertrand, the number of >> interrupts > will be much more frequent as parallel workers would send a >> message > to the leader >> to update the vacuum delay counters every vacuum_delay_point call. > > Hmm, I wonder if that's a good design, if it results in a lot of interrupts.
Skimming the last few messages of that thread [0], it looks like Bertrand is exploring ways to avoid so many interrupts. I guess the unavoidable question is whether this work is still worthwhile given that improvement. > On the patch itself: Making the sleeps in vacuum uninterruptible means that > vacuum will be more slow to respond to interrupts. If you SIGTERM a vacuum > process, or hit CTRL-C, you *would* want to exit the sleep ASAP. Since the delay will typically be pretty small (2 milliseconds by default for autovacuum), I'm assuming this won't ordinarily be noticeable. But I do think it is an important consideration. [0] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/49/5027/ -- nathan
