| From: | Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: error context for vacuum to include block number |
| Date: | 2020-03-27 07:58:52 |
| Message-ID: | CA+fd4k5O3RQp157m+p2ba61tcwtRDYE=7Ja5NCurTwE8=57ekw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 27 Mar 2020 at 07:17, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 10:04:57AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > Does that address your comment ?
>
> I hope so.
Thank you for updating the patch. I'm concerned a bit about overhead
of frequently updating and reverting the callback arguments in
lazy_vacuum_page(). We call that function every time when we vacuum a
page, but if the table has an index, we actually don't need to update
the callback arguments in that function. But I hope it's negligible
since all operation will be performed on memory.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2020-03-27 08:51:59 | Re: WAL usage calculation patch |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-03-27 07:48:45 | Re: potential stuck lock in SaveSlotToPath() |