On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 12:07 PM Melanie Plageman <melanieplage...@gmail.com> wrote: > We didn't end up doing two index vacuum passes. Because it doesn't > repro locally for me, I can only assume that the conditions for > forcing two index vacuuming passes in master just weren't met in this > case. I'm unsurprised, as it is much harder since 17 to force two > passes of index vacuuming. It seems like this might be as unstable as > I feared. I could add more dead data. Or, I could just commit the test > to the back branches before 17. What do you think?
How much margin of error do you have, in terms of total number of dead_items? That is, have you whittled it down to the minimum possible threshold for 2 passes? Some logging with VACUUM VERBOSE (run on the ci instance) might be illuminating. -- Peter Geoghegan
