| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 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 20:27:34 |
| Message-ID: | 20230306202734.GA3033389@nathanxps13 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 02:40:09PM -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> 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).
This was a hack to avoid another level of indentation for that whole block
of code, but based on your comment, it might be better to just surround
this entire section with an "if (params->options & VACOPT_PROCESS_MAIN)"
check. WDYT?
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zheng Li | 2023-03-06 20:37:42 | Re: Support logical replication of DDLs |
| Previous Message | Melanie Plageman | 2023-03-06 20:21:14 | Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?) |