On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 3:33 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 1:30 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 11:10 AM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > If the patch changes the vacuumdb code as above then isn't it better
> > > to change the vacuumdb docs to
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 1:30 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 11:10 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > If the patch changes the vacuumdb code as above then isn't it better
> > to change the vacuumdb docs to reflect the same. See below part of
> > vacuumdb docs:
> > -P parallel_d
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 11:10 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> I responded on that thread and it seems there is no object to the new
> message. I have a minor comment on your patch:
Thanks Amit!
> - printf(_(" -P, --parallel=PARALLEL_DEGREE use this many background
> workers for vacuum, if available\n"
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 6:00 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:43 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> >
> > Your changes look good. About changing the "non-negative integer" to
> > "greater than or equal to zero", there is another thread [1], I am not
> > sure that have we concl
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:43 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 9:00 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
> >
> > Done that way.
> >
> > PSA patch.
>
> Your changes look good. About changing the "non-negative integer" to
> "greater than or equal to zero", there is another thread [1], I
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 9:00 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> Done that way.
>
> PSA patch.
Your changes look good. About changing the "non-negative integer" to
"greater than or equal to zero", there is another thread [1], I am not
sure that have we concluded anything there yet.
- pg_log_error("
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 7:00 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > Yeah, I get it. Even if users don't specify a parallel option there
> > > are chances that parallelism is picked. So the parallel degree is the
> > > final number of workers that are chosen by the server for vacuuming
> > > indexes. And,
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 3:25 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:37 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 11:10 AM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 5:38 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I was going through the p
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:30 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 9:48 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 6:31 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 05:37:50PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > > > 3) Should the Assert(nindexes > 0);
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 6:37 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 11:10 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 5:38 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I was going through the parallel vacuum docs and code. I found below
> > > things, please someone clar
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 11:10 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 5:38 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
> >
> > I was going through the parallel vacuum docs and code. I found below
> > things, please someone clarify:
> >
> > 1) I see that a term "parallel degree" is used in the docs,
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 9:48 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 6:31 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 05:37:50PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > > 3) Should the Assert(nindexes > 0); in begin_parallel_vacuum just be
> > > Assert(nindexes > 1); as this fun
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 6:31 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > 4) IIUC, below comment says that even if PARALLEL 0 is specified with
> > VACUUM command, there are chances that the indexes are vacuumed in
> > parallel. Isn't it a bit unusual that a user specified 0 workers but
> > still the system is pic
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 5:38 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> I was going through the parallel vacuum docs and code. I found below
> things, please someone clarify:
>
> 1) I see that a term "parallel degree" is used in the docs, code
> comments, error messages "parallel vacuum degree must be a
> n
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 5:38 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I was going through the parallel vacuum docs and code. I found below
> things, please someone clarify:
>
> 1) I see that a term "parallel degree" is used in the docs, code
> comments, error messages "parallel vacuum degree must
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 6:31 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 05:37:50PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > 3) Should the Assert(nindexes > 0); in begin_parallel_vacuum just be
> > Assert(nindexes > 1); as this function is entered only when indexes
> > are > 1?
>
> I think you'
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 05:37:50PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> 3) Should the Assert(nindexes > 0); in begin_parallel_vacuum just be
> Assert(nindexes > 1); as this function is entered only when indexes
> are > 1?
I think you're right, at least with the current implementation that
paralleliza
Hi,
I was going through the parallel vacuum docs and code. I found below
things, please someone clarify:
1) I see that a term "parallel degree" is used in the docs, code
comments, error messages "parallel vacuum degree must be a
non-negative integer", "parallel vacuum degree must be between 0 an
18 matches
Mail list logo
