On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 18:47, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 12:53 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor > <mahi6...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > 1. > > > > > > -P, --parallel=PARALLEL_DEGREE do parallel vacuum > > > > > > > > > > > > I think, "do parallel vacuum" should be modified. Without > > > > > > specifying -P, we are still doing parallel vacuum so we can use > > > > > > like "degree for parallel vacuum" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not sure if 'degree' makes it very clear. How about "use this > > > > > many background workers for vacuum, if available"? > > > > > > > > If background workers are many, then automatically, we are using > > > > them(by default parallel vacuum). This option is to put limit on > > > > background workers(limit for vacuum workers) to be used by vacuum > > > > process. > > > > > > > > > > I don't think that the option is just to specify the max limit because > > > that is generally controlled by guc parameters. This option allows > > > users to specify the number of workers for the cases where he has more > > > knowledge about the size/type of indexes. In some cases, the user > > > might be able to make a better decision and that was the reason we > > > have added this option in the first place. > > > > > > > So I think, we can use "max parallel vacuum workers (by default, based > > > > on no. of indexes)" or "control parallel vacuum workers" > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, I feel what I suggested is better because of the above explanation. > > > > Agreed. > > > > Okay, thanks for the review. Attached is an updated patch. I have > additionally run pgindent. I am planning to commit the attached > tomorrow unless I see more comments.
Thank you for committing it! Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
