From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Block level parallel vacuum WIP |
Date: | 2016-08-23 15:17:47 |
Message-ID: | 20160823151747.GA166843@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> 2. When you finish the heap scan, or when the array of dead tuple IDs
> is full (or very nearly full?), perform a cycle of index vacuuming.
> For now, have each worker process a separate index; extra workers just
> wait. Perhaps use the condition variable patch that I posted
> previously to make the workers wait. Then resume the parallel heap
> scan, if not yet done.
At least btrees should easily be scannable in parallel, given that we
process them in physical order rather than logically walk the tree. So
if there are more workers than indexes, it's possible to put more than
one worker on the same index by carefully indicating each to stop at a
predetermined index page number.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2016-08-23 15:18:57 | Re: Proposal for CSN based snapshots |
Previous Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2016-08-23 15:15:26 | Re: [Patch] Temporary tables that do not bloat pg_catalog (a.k.a fast temp tables) |