On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 2:04 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 10:05 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 12:05 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 6:29 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > BTW, if we go with that then we should set the correct phase > > > for workers as well? > > > > If we have separate error context for the leader (vacuumlazy.c) and > > workers (vacuumparallel.c), workers don't necessarily need to have the > > phases such as VACUUM_ERRCB_PHASE_VACUUM_INDEX and > > VACUUM_ERRCB_PHASE_INDEX_CLEANUP. They can use PVIndVacStatus in the > > error callback function as the patch does. > > > > Okay. One minor point, let's change comments atop vacuum.c considering > the movement of new functions.
Thank you for the comment. Agreed. I've attached updated version patches. Please review them. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/
v10-0001-Move-index-vacuum-routines-to-vacuum.c.patch
Description: Binary data
v10-0002-Move-parallel-vacuum-code-to-vacuumparallel.c.patch
Description: Binary data
