|From:||"Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>|
|To:||Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>|
|Cc:||"pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Andres Freund" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Lyes Ameddah <lyes(dot)amd(at)gmail(dot)com>|
|Subject:||Re: Add SKIP LOCKED to VACUUM and ANALYZE|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 7/18/18, 12:00 PM, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
> On 7/17/18, 1:22 AM, "Michael Paquier" <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>> The stuff of get_elevel_for_skipped_relation could be refactored into
>> something used as well by cluster_rel as the same logic is used in three
>> places (vacuum_rel, analyze_rel and cluster_rel with try_relation_open).
> This seems like a good idea if we intend to add SKIP LOCKED to CLUSTER
> eventually, and it would be nice to cut down on some of the duplicated
> ereport() calls. I'll look into it.
Here is a patch for refactoring the ereport() calls out of
vacuum_rel() and analyze_rel(). I've kept all four possible log
statements separated for ease of translation. I considered
simplifying these statements by replacing "vacuum" and "analyze" with
"processing." However, that seems like it could lead to ambiguity for
commands like "VACUUM (ANALYZE, SKIP_LOCKED) table1 (a);" since both
VACUUM and ANALYZE could be skipped independently. If we add
SKIP_LOCKED to CLUSTER in the future, we will need to add two more log
statements to this function.
|Next Message||Marc Dean||2018-07-24 17:43:30||Re: BUG #15293: Stored Procedure Triggered by Logical Replication is Unable to use Notification Events|
|Previous Message||Vladimir Sitnikov||2018-07-24 17:16:35||Re: Stored procedures and out parameters|