On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 6:53 AM Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.saw...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 at 22:33, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hmm, I think we should define these flags in the most simple way. > > Your previous proposal sounds okay to me. > > Okay. As you mentioned before, my previous proposal won't work for > existing index AMs that don't set amparallelvacuumoptions. >
You mean to say it won't work because it has to set multiple flags which means that if IndexAm user doesn't set the value of amparallelvacuumoptions then it won't work? > But since we > have amcanparallelvacuum which is false by default I think we don't > need to worry about backward compatibility problem. The existing index > AM will use neither parallel bulk-deletion nor parallel cleanup by > default. When it wants to support parallel vacuum they will set > amparallelvacuumoptions as well as amcanparallelvacuum. > Hmm, I was not thinking of multiple variables rather only one variable. The default value should indicate that IndexAm doesn't support a parallel vacuum. It might be that we need to do it the way I originally proposed the different values of amparallelvacuumoptions or maybe some variant of it where the default value can clearly say that IndexAm doesn't support a parallel vacuum. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
