On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 7:29 PM Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 2:02 PM Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ah...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Did you see this thread? > >> > https://postgr.es/m/CAGTBQpbDCaR6vv9=scXzuT8fSbckf=a3ngzdwfwzbdvugvh...@mail.gmail.com > >> > > Yes, and somehow did what is explained. > > Did you modify Claudio's patch or write a totally new one? I wrote completely new patch. I tried multiple techniques like using a list instead of fixed size array which I thought was most suitable here, but leave that because of conflict with Parallel Vacuum. > In either case, why did you choose that approach? This is the simplest technique. I just divided the maintenance_work_mem in chunks and allocate chunks as needed. This technique change minimum code and do what we want to achieve. > If you wrote a totally new one, have you compared your work with > Claudio's, to see if he covered > anything you might need to cover? No, this part I missed, I will do that and will share my thoughts. > Please explain why your patch is > better/different than his. > > > -- > Robert Haas > EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com > The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company > -- Ibrar Ahmed
