Re: Periodic FSM vacuum doesn't happen in one-pass strategy vacuum.

From: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Subject: Re: Periodic FSM vacuum doesn't happen in one-pass strategy vacuum.
Date: 2025-06-30 13:20:33
Message-ID: CAAKRu_YAg6NH-UT5wk=gLvXDLr2g40LybXGPYYyWUqejAzCKyw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 6:59 PM Melanie Plageman
<melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> So, I think we should commit the fix you proposed.
>
> The only question I have left is implementation: should we have
> ndeleted as an output parameter of lazy_scan_prune() or have
> lazy_scan_prune() return it (instead of void)?
>
> In <= 16, heap_page_prune() returned the number of tuples deleted, so
> I thought of maybe having lazy_scan_prune() do this. Though, maybe it
> is confusing to have one result returned as the return value and the
> others returned in output parameters unless there is something more
> special about ndeleted. With heap_page_prune(), I think it was the
> return value because that was kind of what heap_page_prune()
> "accomplished".

Hi Sawada-san,

Just checking what you thought about this. We probably want to get
this committed and backported relatively soon. I'm happy to help with
that if needed but just want to make sure we are on the same page
about the fix.

- Melanie

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2025-06-30 13:25:37 Re: pg_get_multixact_members not documented
Previous Message Sami Imseih 2025-06-30 13:08:04 Re: pg_get_multixact_members not documented