On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 9:07 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 9:30 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > If I am not missing anything then that change was in
> > > lazy_cleanup_index and after this patch, it won't be required because
> > > we are using a different variable name.
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 9:30 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> >
> > If I am not missing anything then that change was in
> > lazy_cleanup_index and after this patch, it won't be required because
> > we are using a different variable name.
> >
> > I have combined both the patches now.
> >
>
> I am
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 9:19 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 7:25 AM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> >
> >
> > Comments:
> >
> > > * The index name is saved only during this phase and restored
> > > immediately
> >
> > => I wouldn't say "only" since it's saved during
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 7:25 AM Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
>
> > I have done some testing with both the patches and would like to do
> > more unless there are objections with these.
>
> Comments:
>
> > * The index name is saved only during this phase and restored
> > immediately
>
> => I
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 02:31:51PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> I have looked at both the patches (using separate variables (by
> Justin) and using a struct (by Andres)) and found the second one bit
> better.
Thanks for looking.
> I have improved some comments in the code and for now, kept as two
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 11:49 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2020-06-23 00:14:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund writes:
> > > I am only suggesting that where you save the old location, as currently
> > > done with LVRelStats olderrinfo, you instead use a more specific
> > >
Hi,
On 2020-06-23 00:14:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > I am only suggesting that where you save the old location, as currently
> > done with LVRelStats olderrinfo, you instead use a more specific
> > type. Not that you should pass that anywhere (except for
> >
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 12:14:40AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > I am only suggesting that where you save the old location, as currently
> > done with LVRelStats olderrinfo, you instead use a more specific
> > type. Not that you should pass that anywhere (except for
> >
Andres Freund writes:
> I am only suggesting that where you save the old location, as currently
> done with LVRelStats olderrinfo, you instead use a more specific
> type. Not that you should pass that anywhere (except for
> update_vacuum_error_info).
As things currently stand, I don't think we
Hi,
On 2020-06-22 20:43:47 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 01:57:12PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2020-06-22 15:43:11 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 01:09:39PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > I'm also uncomfortable with the approach of
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 7:13 AM Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 01:57:12PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > No, I don't think that's a solution. I think it's wrong to have
> > something like olderrinfo in the first place. Using a struct with ~25
> > members to store the
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 01:57:12PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2020-06-22 15:43:11 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 01:09:39PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > I'm also uncomfortable with the approach of just copying all of
> > > LVRelStats in several places:
> > >
>
Justin Pryzby writes:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 06:15:27PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> That seems like rather pointless micro-optimization really; the struct's
>> not *that* large. But I have a different complaint now that I look at
>> this code: is it safe at all? I see that the indname field is
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 06:15:27PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > No, I don't think that's a solution. I think it's wrong to have
> > something like olderrinfo in the first place. Using a struct with ~25
> > members to store the current state of three variables just doesn't
Andres Freund writes:
> No, I don't think that's a solution. I think it's wrong to have
> something like olderrinfo in the first place. Using a struct with ~25
> members to store the current state of three variables just doesn't make
> sense. Why isn't this just a LVSavedPosition struct or
Hi,
On 2020-06-22 15:43:11 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 01:09:39PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I'm also uncomfortable with the approach of just copying all of
> > LVRelStats in several places:
> >
> > > /*
> > > @@ -1580,9 +1648,15 @@ lazy_vacuum_page(Relation
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 01:09:39PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2020-06-22 10:35:47 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > I propose to backpatch b61d161c14 [1] (Introduce vacuum errcontext to
> > display additional information.).
...
> I think having the additional information in the back branches
17 matches
Mail list logo
