Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM

From: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM
Date: 2023-03-06 19:40:09
Message-ID: 20230306194009.5cn6sp3wjotd36nu@liskov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 09:37:23AM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 04:51:46PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > That was mostly OK for me, so applied after tweaking a couple of
> > places in the tests (extra explanations, for one), the comments and
> > the code.

I noticed in vacuum_rel() in vacuum.c where table_relation_vacuum() is
called, 4211fbd84 changes the else into an else if [1]. I understand
after reading the commit and re-reading the code why that is now, but I
was initially confused. I was thinking it might be nice to have a
comment mentioning why there is no else case here (i.e. that the main
table relation will be vacuumed on the else if branch).

- Melanie

[1] https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blob/master/src/backend/commands/vacuum.c#L2078

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2023-03-06 19:48:02 Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings (was: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15)
Previous Message Andres Freund 2023-03-06 19:34:04 Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)