On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 9:12 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 9:03 AM Justin Pryzby <pry...@telsasoft.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 08:54:17AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 8:55 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 7:52 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VACUUM (PARALLEL 1) tmp; -- disables parallel vacuum option > > > > > +VACUUM (PARALLEL 1) tmp; -- parallel vacuum disabled for temp tables > > > > > WARNING: disabling parallel option of vacuum on "tmp" --- cannot > > > > > vacuum temporary tables in parallel > > > > > +VACUUM (PARALLEL 0, FULL TRUE) tmp; -- can specify parallel disabled > > > > > (even though that's implied by FULL) > > > > > > > > > > To fully close the gap in the tests, I would also add a test for > > > > > (PARALLEL 1, FULL false) where FULL directly specified, even if that > > > > > sounds like a nit. That's fine to test even on a temporary table. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Okay, I will do this once we agree on the error message stuff. > > > > > > > > > > I have changed one of the existing tests to test the option suggested > > > by you. Additionally, I have changed the docs as per suggestion from > > > Sawada-san. I haven't changed the error message. Let me know if you > > > have any more comments? > > > > You did: > > |...then the number of workers is determined based on the number of > > |indexes that support parallel vacuum operation on the > > [-relation,-]{+relation+} and is further > > |limited by <xref linkend="guc-max-parallel-workers-maintenance"/>. > > > > I'd suggest to say instead: > > |...then the number of workers is determined based on the number of > > |indexes ON THE RELATION that support parallel vacuum operation, and is > > further > > |limited by <xref linkend="guc-max-parallel-workers-maintenance"/>. > > > > I have not changed this now but I find your suggestion better than > existing wording. I'll change this before committing the patch unless > there are more comments. >
Pushed. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com