On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 12:03 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 10:11 AM Justin Pryzby <pry...@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > Seems fine.  Rather than saying "different phases" I, would say:
> > "The index vacuum and heap vacuum phases may be called multiple times in the
> > middle of the heap scan phase."
> >
> Okay, I have slightly adjusted the wording as per your suggestion.
> > But actually I think the concern is not that we unnecessarily "Revert back 
> > to
> > the old phase" but that we do it in a *loop*.  Which I agree doesn't make
> > sense, to go back and forth between "scanning heap" and "truncating".
> >
> Fair point.  I have moved the change to the truncate phase at the
> caller of lazy_heap_truncate() which should address this concern.
> Sawada-San, does this address your concern?

Forgot to attach the patch, doing now.

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment: v35-0001-Introduce-vacuum-errcontext-to-display-additiona.patch
Description: Binary data

Reply via email to