Re: doc review for parallel vacuum

From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Mahendra Singh Thalor <mahi6run(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: doc review for parallel vacuum
Date: 2020-04-13 21:24:40
Message-ID: 20200413212440.GB2228@telsasoft.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 03:22:06PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 2:00 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > |Copy the index
> > |bulk-deletion result returned from ambulkdelete and amvacuumcleanup to
> > |the DSM segment if it's the first time [???] because they allocate locally
> > |and it's possible that an index will be vacuumed by a different
> > |vacuum process the next time."
> >
> > Is it correct to say: "..if it's the first iteration" and "different process on
> > the next iteration" ? Or "cycle" ?
> >
>
> "cycle" sounds better. I have changed the patch as per your latest
> comments. Let me know what you think?

Looks good. One more change:

[-Even if-]{+If+} this option is specified with the <option>ANALYZE</option> [-option-]{+option,+}

Remove "even" and add comma.

Thanks,
--
Justin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2020-04-13 21:26:10 Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2020-04-13 21:20:40 Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?