Re: Backpatch b61d161c14 (Introduce vacuum errcontext ...)

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 7:25 AM Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> > I have done some testing with both the patches and would like to do
> > more unless there are objections with these.
>
> Comments:
>
> > * The index name is saved only during this phase and restored immediately
>
> => I wouldn't say "only" since it's saved during lazy_vacuum: index AND cleanup.
>
> >update_vacuum_error_info(LVRelStats *errinfo, LVSavedErrInfo *oldpos, int phase,
>
> => You called your struct "LVSavedErrInfo" but the variables are still called
> "pos". I would call it olderrinfo or just old.
>

Fixed both of the above comments. I used the variable name as saved_err_info.

> Also, this doesn't (re)rename the "cbarg" stuff that Alvaro didn't like, which
> was my 0001 patch.
>

If I am not missing anything then that change was in
lazy_cleanup_index and after this patch, it won't be required because
we are using a different variable name.

I have combined both the patches now.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com