Re: Questions/Observations related to Gist vacuum

On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 2:17 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 10:53 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > > Basically, only IndexBulkDeleteResult is now shared across the stage
> > > so we can move all members to GistVacState and completely get rid of
> > > GistBulkDeleteResult?
> > >
> >
> > Yes, something like that would be better. Let's try and see how it comes out.
> I have modified as we discussed. Please take a look.
>

Thanks, I haven't reviewed this yet, but it seems to be on the right
lines. Sawada-San, can you please prepare the next version of the
parallel vacuum patch on top of this patch and enable parallel vacuum
for Gist indexes? We can do the review of this patch in detail once
the parallel vacuum patch is in better shape as without that it
wouldn't make sense to commit this patch.

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