| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_stat_statements issue with parallel maintenance (Was Re: WAL usage calculation patch) |
| Date: | 2020-04-01 06:31:24 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+XyK1RbgVmaTOY9FHW19mRT2uCFWrmL2iGSFarAHhVqg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 8:51 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > Agreed. I've attached the updated patch.
> >
> > Thank you for testing, Dilip!
>
> Thanks! One hunk is failing on the latest head. And, I have rebased
> the patch for my testing so posting the same. I have done some more
> testing to test multi-pass vacuum.
>
The patch looks good to me. I have done a few minor modifications (a)
moved the declaration of variable closer to where it is used, (b)
changed a comment, (c) ran pgindent. I have also done some additional
testing with more number of indexes and found that vacuum and parallel
vacuum used the same number of total_read_blks and that is what is
expected here.
Let me know what you think of the attached?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| bufferusage_vacuum_v6.patch | application/octet-stream | 5.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2020-04-01 06:40:08 | snapshot too old issues, first around wraparound and then more. |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2020-04-01 06:15:11 | Re: shared-memory based stats collector |