Re: autovacuum: automatically propagate updated parameters

> On 25 Sep 2026, at 09:45, Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2026, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> So if we want to
>> use the condition variable, it seems better to me to have a dedicated
>> wait function in vacuumparallel.c that waits until all indexes are
>> completed, and then call WaitForParallelWorkersToFinish().
>
> That'll bring back the more complicated approach of v2, and also make
> this part of the code more complex.

I think that would be cleaner, but also more invasive at post-beta4.

> While I didn't do proper measurements, my logic against it was similar
> to what Manu already posted, that it seems harmless here and it is
> significantly simpler than adding a cv.
>
> Also, I think both issues could be solved in a more proper way with
> more refactoring, but that seems excessive for 19. (And in that case,
> going with a simple solution for 19 also seems like a good answer to
> me)

Given where we are in the cycle I am also in favor of a simpler solution unless
it's shown to have (severe) performance regressions.

--
Daniel Gustafsson