Hi, On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 1:43 PM Masahiko Sawada <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I would just cap it at 1s like this: > > > + msec = Min(msec, Min(vacuum_cost_delay * 4 * nworkers, 1000)); > > Sound reasonable change.
Thanks. Done that in the attached v3 patch. > > I tend to agree with your point on not back-patching to <= PG18. As > > mentioned upthread [1], the fact that it hasn't been reported so far > > means it may have gone unnoticed, or everyone wanted vacuum to run > > faster at the cost of foreground path performance. > > I'd like to withdraw my previous proposal to backpatch it to all > supported versions. We haven't received any complaints about this > behavior so far, and with the fix VACUUM could get slower after a > minor update. So I agree to push it to v19 and master, and I think we > should mention this behavior change in the v19 release notes. Agreed. > Also, I think it'd be better to update the paragraph in maintenance.sgml > that says parallel workers use the same cost delay parameters as the > leader, to mention that they share the cost limit. Done. Please find the attached v3 patch. -- Bharath Rupireddy Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
v3-0001-Parallel-vacuum-workers-together-with-leader-coul.patch
Description: Binary data
