| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel heap vacuum |
| Date: | 2025-07-25 17:40:10 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoaxu8w0ieP7ofKvbY5T5qnvOG=AhVka19QMhG-nuXuVzQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 7:49 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> That is not to say you can't have callbacks or such, it just doesn't make
> sense for those callbacks to be at the level of tableam. If you want to make
> vacuumparallel support parallel table vacuuming for multiple table AMs (I'm
> somewhat doubtful that's a good idea), you could do that by having a
> vacuumparallel.c specific callback struct.
I'm not doubtful that this is a good idea. There are a number of
tableams around these days that are "heap except whatever", where (I
suspect) the size of "whatever" ranges from quite small to moderately
large. I imagine that such efforts end up duplicating a lot of heapam
code and probably always will; but if we can avoid increasing that
amount, I think it's a good idea.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2025-07-25 18:01:01 | Re: Test instability when pg_dump orders by OID |
| Previous Message | Fabrízio de Royes Mello | 2025-07-25 17:06:12 | Re: Use PqMsg_* macros in basebackup_copy.c |