On Fri, Dec 24, 2021 at 11:59 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 10:56 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 10:55 PM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 6:22 PM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 5:39
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 10:56 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 10:55 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 6:22 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 5:39 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2)
> > > >
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 10:55 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 6:22 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 5:39 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > 2)
> > > +#include "utils/rel.h"
> > > +#include "utils/lsyscache.h"
> > > +#include
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 9:55 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 6:22 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 5:39 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > 2)
> > > +#include "utils/rel.h"
> > > +#include "utils/lsyscache.h"
> > > +#include
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 6:22 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 5:39 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > 2)
> > +#include "utils/rel.h"
> > +#include "utils/lsyscache.h"
> > +#include "utils/memutils.h"
> >
> > It might be better to keep the header file in alphabetical
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 5:39 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 11:36 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 10:24 PM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
>
> The patch looks mostly good to me.
> I only have few comments.
>
> 1)
> +/*
> + * Do parallel index
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 11:36 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 10:24 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 11:24 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 2:04 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thank you for the comment. Agreed.
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 10:24 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 11:24 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 2:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> >
> > Thank you for the comment. Agreed.
> >
> > I've attached updated version patches. Please review them.
> >
>
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 8:38 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 10:24 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 11:24 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 2:04 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thank you for the comment. Agreed.
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 10:24 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 11:24 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 2:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> >
> > Thank you for the comment. Agreed.
> >
> > I've attached updated version patches. Please review them.
> >
>
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 11:24 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 2:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
>
> Thank you for the comment. Agreed.
>
> I've attached updated version patches. Please review them.
>
These look mostly good to me. Please find attached the slightly edited
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 2:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 10:05 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 12:05 PM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 6:29 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > BTW, if we go with that then
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 10:05 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 12:05 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 6:29 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
>
> > BTW, if we go with that then we should set the correct phase
> > for workers as well?
>
> If we have
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 12:05 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 6:29 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 1:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. What is the reason for not moving
> > > > > lazy_vacuum_one_index/lazy_cleanup_one_index to
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 6:29 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 1:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > 2. What is the reason for not moving
> > > > lazy_vacuum_one_index/lazy_cleanup_one_index to vacuum.c so that they
> > > > can be called from vacuumlazy.c and
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 1:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 8:33 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 3:38 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > Few comments:
> > > =
> > > 1.
> > > + * dead_items stores TIDs whose index tuples are deleted by
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 8:33 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 3:38 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > Few comments:
> > =
> > 1.
> > + * dead_items stores TIDs whose index tuples are deleted by index
> > vacuuming.
> > + * Each TID points to an LP_DEAD line pointer
On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 3:38 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 10:51 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > I've attached updated patches. The first patch just moves common
> > function for index bulk-deletion and cleanup to vacuum.c. And the
> > second patch moves parallel vacuum
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 10:51 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> I've attached updated patches. The first patch just moves common
> function for index bulk-deletion and cleanup to vacuum.c. And the
> second patch moves parallel vacuum code to vacuumparallel.c. The
> comments I got so far are
On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 4:27 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 4:03 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 12:03 PM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > > There is still pending
> > > work related to moving parallel vacuum code to a separate file and a
> > > few
On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 10:38 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 6:13 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 1:56 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 1:33 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I've attached an updated patch.
On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 6:13 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 1:56 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 1:33 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I've attached an updated patch. The patch incorporated several changes
> > > from the last version:
> > >
On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 1:56 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 1:33 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > I've attached an updated patch. The patch incorporated several changes
> > from the last version:
> >
> > * Rename parallel_vacuum_begin() to parallel_vacuum_init()
> > * Unify
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 4:03 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 12:03 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > There is still pending
> > work related to moving parallel vacuum code to a separate file and a
> > few other pending comments that are still under discussion. We can
> > take care of
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 1:33 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> I've attached an updated patch. The patch incorporated several changes
> from the last version:
>
> * Rename parallel_vacuum_begin() to parallel_vacuum_init()
> * Unify the terminology; use "index bulk-deletion" and "index cleanup"
>
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 12:03 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 7:40 AM tanghy.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, December 13, 2021 2:12 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 2:09 PM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Dec
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 8:23 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 7:03 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > Thanks, I can take care of this before committing. The v9-0001* looks
> > good to me as well, so, I am planning to commit that tomorrow unless I
> > see more comments or any
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 7:03 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> Thanks, I can take care of this before committing. The v9-0001* looks
> good to me as well, so, I am planning to commit that tomorrow unless I
> see more comments or any objection to that.
I would like to thank both Masahiko and yourself for
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 7:40 AM tanghy.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Monday, December 13, 2021 2:12 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 2:09 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 10:33 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 10,
On Tuesday, December 14, 2021 10:11 AM Tang, Haiying wrote:
> On Monday, December 13, 2021 2:12 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > I've attached the patch. I've just moved some functions back but not
> > done other changes.
> >
>
> Thanks for your patch.
>
> I tested your patch and tried some
On Monday, December 13, 2021 2:12 PM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 2:09 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 10:33 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 9:08 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 6:05 PM
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 2:09 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 10:33 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 9:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 6:05 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 7:44 PM
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 10:33 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 9:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 6:05 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 7:44 PM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Agreed with the above two points.
>
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 9:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 6:05 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 7:44 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > Agreed with the above two points.
> >
> > I've attached updated patches that incorporated the above comments
> > too.
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 12:03 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 8:30 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 2:32 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 2021-10-30 14:21:01 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > Due to bug #17245: [1] I spent a
On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 8:30 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 2:32 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2021-10-30 14:21:01 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > Due to bug #17245: [1] I spent a considerably amount of time looking at
> > > vacuum
> > > related code.
On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 2:32 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2021-10-30 14:21:01 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Due to bug #17245: [1] I spent a considerably amount of time looking at
> > vacuum
> > related code. And I found a few things that I think could stand improvement:
Thank you
Hi,
On 2021-10-30 14:21:01 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Due to bug #17245: [1] I spent a considerably amount of time looking at vacuum
> related code. And I found a few things that I think could stand improvement:
While working on the fix for #17255 (more specifically some cleanup that Peter
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 6:05 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 7:44 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> Agreed with the above two points.
>
> I've attached updated patches that incorporated the above comments
> too. Please review them.
>
I have made the following minor changes to the
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 7:05 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 10:17 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:06 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:03 PM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 6:01 PM
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 3:35 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 10:17 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:06 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > > > 2. The patch seems to be calling parallel_vacuum_should_skip_index
> > > > thrice even before starting parallel
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 10:17 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:06 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:03 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 6:01 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I've attached updated patches.
> > > >
On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 12:22 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, December 7, 2021 1:42 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > I've attached an updated patch. I've removed 0003 patch that added
> > regression tests as per discussion. Regarding the terminology like "bulkdel"
> > and
On Tuesday, December 7, 2021 1:42 PM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
> I've attached an updated patch. I've removed 0003 patch that added
> regression tests as per discussion. Regarding the terminology like "bulkdel"
> and "cleanup" you pointed out, I've done that in 0002 patch while moving the
> code to
On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 6:54 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 1:47 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:06 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 3. /*
> > > > * Copy the index bulk-deletion result returned from ambulkdelete and
> > > > @@
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 1:47 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:06 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:03 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 6:01 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I've attached updated patches.
> > > >
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:06 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:03 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 6:01 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I've attached updated patches.
> > >
> >
> > I have a few comments on v4-0001.
>
> Thank you for the
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:03 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 6:01 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > I've attached updated patches.
> >
>
> I have a few comments on v4-0001.
Thank you for the comments!
> 1.
> In parallel_vacuum_process_all_indexes(), we can combine the two
>
and
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:56 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 2:33 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 6:01 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I've attached updated patches.
> > >
> >
> > I have a few comments on v4-0001.
> >
>
> The new test
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 2:33 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 6:01 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > I've attached updated patches.
> >
>
> I have a few comments on v4-0001.
>
The new test proposed by v4-0003 is increasing the vacuum_parallel.sql
timing by more than 10 times. It
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 3:01 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Thur, Dec 2, 2021 8:31 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > I've attached updated patches.
> >
> > The first patch is the main patch for refactoring parallel vacuum code;
> > removes
> > bitmap-related code and renames function names
On Thur, Dec 2, 2021 8:31 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I've attached updated patches.
>
> The first patch is the main patch for refactoring parallel vacuum code;
> removes
> bitmap-related code and renames function names for consistency. The second
> patch moves these parallel-related codes to
On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 6:01 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> I've attached updated patches.
>
I have a few comments on v4-0001.
1.
In parallel_vacuum_process_all_indexes(), we can combine the two
checks for vacuum/cleanup at the beginning of the function and I think
it is better to keep the
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 3:00 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 11:03 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 11:38 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > >
> >
> > 2)
> > + /* Reinitialize the parallel context to relaunch parallel
> > workers */
> >
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 11:03 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 11:38 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
>
> 2)
> + /* Reinitialize the parallel context to relaunch parallel
> workers */
> + if (!pvs->first_time)
>
> It seems the
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 11:38 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> Maybe we can start with using parallel_vacuum_*. We can change them
> later if there is an argument.
>
> I've attached an updated patch. I don't update the terminology in
> vacuum that we're discussing on another thread[1].
Hi,
I
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 5:54 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 12:16 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 1:34 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 7:43 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 1:48 PM
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 12:16 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 1:34 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 7:43 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 1:48 PM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 7:55
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 1:34 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 7:43 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 1:48 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 7:55 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 4)
> > > >
> > > > Just
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 1:28 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 7:07 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 6:35 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 11:23 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I've incorporated these comments
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 7:43 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 1:48 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 7:55 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > 4)
> > >
> > > Just a personal suggestion for the parallel related function name. Since
> > >
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 7:07 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 6:35 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 11:23 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I've incorporated these comments and attached an updated patch.
> > >
> >
> > Review comments:
> >
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 7:48 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 11:25 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > 3)
> >
> > + /*
> > +* Reset all index status back to invalid (while checking that we
> > have
> > +* processed all indexes).
> > +*/
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 11:25 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Tues, Nov 16, 2021 1:53 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > I've incorporated these comments and attached an updated patch.
>
> Thanks for updating the patch.
> I read the latest patch and have few comments.
Thank you for the
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 1:48 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 7:55 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tues, Nov 16, 2021 1:53 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > I've incorporated these comments and attached an updated patch.
> >
> >
> > 2)
> > static void
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 6:35 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 11:23 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > I've incorporated these comments and attached an updated patch.
> >
>
> Review comments:
>
> 1.
> index_can_participate_parallel_vacuum()
> {
> ..
> + /*
> +
On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 11:23 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> I've incorporated these comments and attached an updated patch.
>
Review comments:
1.
index_can_participate_parallel_vacuum()
{
..
+ /*
+ * Not safe, if the index supports parallel cleanup conditionally,
+ * but we have
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 7:55 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Tues, Nov 16, 2021 1:53 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > I've incorporated these comments and attached an updated patch.
>
>
> 2)
> static void vacuum_error_callback(void *arg);
>
> I noticed the patch changed the parallel
On Tues, Nov 16, 2021 1:53 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I've incorporated these comments and attached an updated patch.
Thanks for updating the patch.
I read the latest patch and have few comments.
1)
+/*
+ * lazy_vacuum_one_index() -- vacuum index relation.
...
+IndexBulkDeleteResult *
On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 11:38 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Thur, Nov 11, 2021 10:41 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > I've attached a draft patch that refactors parallel vacuum and separates
> > parallel-vacuum-related code to new file vacuumparallel.c.
> > After discussion, I'll divide
On Thur, Nov 11, 2021 10:41 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I've attached a draft patch that refactors parallel vacuum and separates
> parallel-vacuum-related code to new file vacuumparallel.c.
> After discussion, I'll divide the patch into logical chunks.
Hi.
I noticed few minor issues in the
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 8:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 2:01 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 6:38 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 8:11 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I've attached a draft patch that
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 2:01 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 6:38 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 8:11 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I've attached a draft patch that refactors parallel vacuum and
> > > separates parallel-vacuum-related
On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 6:38 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 8:11 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > I've attached a draft patch that refactors parallel vacuum and
> > separates parallel-vacuum-related code to new file vacuumparallel.c.
> > After discussion, I'll divide the
On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 8:11 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> I've attached a draft patch that refactors parallel vacuum and
> separates parallel-vacuum-related code to new file vacuumparallel.c.
> After discussion, I'll divide the patch into logical chunks.
>
> What I'm not convinced yet in this
On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 9:53 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 4:00 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2021-11-01 10:44:34 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 6:21 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > But even though we have this space
On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 4:00 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2021-11-01 10:44:34 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 6:21 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > But even though we have this space optimized bitmap thing, we actually
> > > need
> > > more memory allocated
On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 6:25 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 12:42 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > Since "The leader process alone processes all parallel-safe indexes in
> > the case where no workers are launched" (no change there), I wonder:
> > how does the leader *know* that
On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 4:42 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 10:25 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > I've attached a draft patch. The patch incorporated all comments from
> > Andres except for the last comment that moves parallel related code to
> > another file. I'd like to
On Thur, Nov 4, 2021 1:25 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 1:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 11:17 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 5:57 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Rather than inventing
On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 12:42 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Since "The leader process alone processes all parallel-safe indexes in
> the case where no workers are launched" (no change there), I wonder:
> how does the leader *know* that it's the leader (and so can always
> process any indexes) inside
On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 10:25 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I've attached a draft patch. The patch incorporated all comments from
> Andres except for the last comment that moves parallel related code to
> another file. I'd like to discuss how we split vacuumlazy.c.
This looks great!
I wonder if
Hi,
On 2021-11-01 10:44:34 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 6:21 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > But even though we have this space optimized bitmap thing, we actually
> > need
> > more memory allocated for each index, making this whole thing pointless.
>
> Right. But is
On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 1:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 11:17 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 5:57 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > Rather than inventing PARALLEL_VACUUM_KEY_INDVAC_CHECK (just for
> > > assert-enabled builds), we should
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 11:17 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 5:57 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> >
>
> > Rather than inventing PARALLEL_VACUUM_KEY_INDVAC_CHECK (just for
> > assert-enabled builds), we should invent PARALLEL_VACUUM_STATS -- a
> > dedicated shmem area for the
On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 11:53 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:35 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > It returns true in the above condition but it should return false
> > since the index doesn't support parallel index cleanup at all. It
> > seems that this bug was introduced by
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:35 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> It returns true in the above condition but it should return false
> since the index doesn't support parallel index cleanup at all. It
> seems that this bug was introduced by commit b4af70cb21 (therefore
> exists only in PG14) which flipped
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 2:46 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> Anyway, I'll write a patch accordingly.
While writing a patch for these comments, I found another bug in
parallel_processing_is_safe():
/*
* Returns false, if the given index can't participate in parallel index
* vacuum or parallel
On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 7:15 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 6:21 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > - Imo it's pretty confusing to have functions like
> > lazy_parallel_vacuum_indexes() (in 13, renamed in 14) that "Perform index
> > vacuum or index cleanup with parallel
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 5:57 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 5:47 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > For discussion, I've written a patch only for adding some tests to
> > parallel vacuum. The test includes the reported case where small
> > indexes are not processed by the leader
On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 5:47 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> For discussion, I've written a patch only for adding some tests to
> parallel vacuum. The test includes the reported case where small
> indexes are not processed by the leader process as well as cases where
> different kinds of indexes
On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 10:44 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 6:21 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Due to bug #17245: [1] I spent a considerably amount of time looking at
> > vacuum
> > related code. And I found a few things that I think could stand improvement:
On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 6:21 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Due to bug #17245: [1] I spent a considerably amount of time looking at vacuum
> related code. And I found a few things that I think could stand improvement:
>
> - There's pretty much no tests. This is way way too complicated
93 matches
Mail list logo
