Am 07.11.2013 12:42, schrieb Dilip kumar:
Advertising
> This patch implementing the following TODO item > > Allow parallel cores to be used by vacuumdb > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4f10a728.7090...@agliodbs.com [1] > > Like Parallel pg_dump, vacuumdb is provided with the option to run the vacuum of multiple tables in parallel. [ VACUUMDB –J ] > > 1. One new option is provided with vacuumdb to give the number of workers. > > 2. All worker will be started in beginning and all will be waiting for the vacuum instruction from the master. > > 3. Now, if table list is provided in vacuumdb command using -t then, it will send the vacuum of one table to one of the IDLE worker, next table to next IDLE worker and so on. > > 4. If vacuum is given for one DB then, it will execute select on pg_class to get the table list and fetch the table name one by one and also assign the vacuum responsibility to IDLE workers. > > [...] For this use case, would it make sense to queue work (tables) in order of their size, starting on the largest one? For the case where you have tables of varying size this would lead to a reduced overall processing time as it prevents large (read: long processing time) tables to be processed in the last step. While processing large tables at first and filling up "processing slots/jobs" when they get free with smaller tables one after the other would safe overall execution time. Regards Jan -- professional: http://www.oscar-consult.de Links: ------ [1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4f10a728.7090...@agliodbs.com
