Hi, On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 04:04:53PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 04:59:54AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > > Please find attached v6, a mandatory rebase due to catversion bump conflict. > > I'm removing the catversion bump from the patch as it generates too frequent > > conflicts (just mention it needs to be done in the commit message). > > v6 looks generally reasonable to me.
Thanks for looking at it! > I think the > nap_time_since_last_report variable needs to be marked static, though. Agree. > One thing that occurs to me is that this information may not be > particularly useful when parallel workers are used. Without parallelism, > it's easy enough to figure out the percentage of time that your VACUUM is > spending asleep, but when there are parallel workers, it may be hard to > deduce much of anything from the value. I think that if the number of parallel workers being used are the same across runs then one can measure "accurately" the impact of some changes (set vacuum_cost_delay=... for example) on the delay. Without the patch one could just guess as many others factors could impact the vacuum duration (load on the system, i/o latency,...). Regards, -- Bertrand Drouvot PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
