Hello > I just thought they were concerned > that the variable name skip_index might be confusing because we skip > if skip_index is NOT true.
Right. >> > - bool skip_index = (get_indstats(lps->lvshared, i) == NULL || >> > - skip_parallel_vacuum_index(Irel[i], lps->lvshared)); >> > + bool can_parallel = (get_indstats(lps->lvshared, i) == NULL || >> > + skip_parallel_vacuum_index(Irel[i], >> > + lps->lvshared)); >> > >> > The above condition is true when the index can *not* do parallel index >> vacuum. Ouch, right. I was wrong. (or the variable name and the comment really confused me) > Okay, would it better if we get rid of this variable and have code like below? > > /* Skip the indexes that can be processed by parallel workers */ > if ( !(get_indstats(lps->lvshared, i) == NULL || > skip_parallel_vacuum_index(Irel[i], lps->lvshared))) > continue; Complex condition... Not sure. > How about changing it to skipped_index and change the comment to something > like “We are interested in only index skipped parallel vacuum”? I prefer this idea. > Today, again thinking about it, it seems > the idea Mahendra is suggesting that is giving an error if the > parallel degree is not specified seems reasonable to me. +1 regards, Sergei
