On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 10:43 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 1:43 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 6:37 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 1:34 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > IIRC, there was one of the blocker for implementing parallel heap vacuum > was group locking, have we already resolved that issue or its being > included in this patch set? > > I recall we had some discussion on changes to group locking for > implementing parallel heap vacuum, but I don't remember if we have a > blocker now. > > One problem we previously had was that since the relation extension > locks were not in conflict between parallel workers and the leader, > multiple workers could extend the visibility map simultaneously. This > problem was fixed by commit 85f6b49c2c. > Yes, that's correct. As part of that commit, we made the relation extension lock conflict among group members, ensuring that multiple workers cannot acquire it simultaneously. Additionally, this cannot cause a deadlock because no other locks are held while the relation extension lock is being held. Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
