On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 5:03 PM Melanie Plageman <melanieplage...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 8, 2025 at 1:42 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I've attached the updated version patches. > > I've started trying to review this and realized that, while I'm > familiar with heap vacuuming code, I'm not familiar enough with the > vacuumparallel.c machinery to be of help without much additional > study. As such, I have mainly focused on reading the comments in your > code.
Thank you for looking at the patch. > > I think your comment in vacuumlazy.c describing the design could use > more detail and a bit of massaging. > > For example, I don't know what you mean when you say: > > * We could require different number of parallel vacuum workers for each phase > * for various factors such as table size and number of indexes. > > Does that refer to something you did implement or you are saying we > could do that in the future? It referred to the parallel heap vacuum implementation that I wrote. Since the parallel degrees for parallel heap scan and parallel index vacuuming are chosen separately based on different factors, we launch a different number of workers for each phase and they exit at the end of each phase. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
