Hi, I got following FAILED when I patched v3 to HEAD.
$ patch -d. -p1 < ../patch/vacuumdb_parallel_v3.patch patching file doc/src/sgml/ref/vacuumdb.sgml Hunk #1 succeeded at 224 (offset 20 lines). patching file src/bin/scripts/Makefile Hunk #2 succeeded at 65 with fuzz 2 (offset -1 lines). patching file src/bin/scripts/vac_parallel.c patching file src/bin/scripts/vac_parallel.h patching file src/bin/scripts/vacuumdb.c Hunk #3 succeeded at 61 with fuzz 2. Hunk #4 succeeded at 87 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 143 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #6 succeeded at 158 (offset 5 lines). Hunk #7 succeeded at 214 with fuzz 2 (offset 5 lines). Hunk #8 FAILED at 223. Hunk #9 succeeded at 374 with fuzz 1 (offset 35 lines). Hunk #10 FAILED at 360. Hunk #11 FAILED at 387. 3 out of 11 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/bin/scripts/vacuumdb.c.rej --- Sawada Masahiko On Friday, March 21, 2014, Dilip kumar <dilip.ku...@huawei.com> wrote: > On 16 January 2014 19:53, Euler Taveira Wrote, > > > > > > >> 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. > > > Good point, I have made the change and attached the modified patch. > > > > > Don't you submit it for a CF, do you? Is it too late for this CF? > > Attached the latest updated patch > 1. Rebased the patch to current GIT head. > 2. Doc is updated. > 3. Supported parallel execution for all db option also. > > Same I will add to current open commitfest.. > > Regards, > Dilip > -- Regards, ------- Sawada Masahiko
