Re: New vacuum option to do only freezing

From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New vacuum option to do only freezing
Date: 2019-03-26 15:12:38
Message-ID: CAD21AoCR+FFi8kS=9OVJgrEA5YLbzDgoRXN24Mh3mw5-Jy3FBA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 3:25 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 12:14 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > IIUC we've discussed the field-and-value style vacuum option. I
> > suggested that since we have already the disable_page_skipping option
> > the disable_page_skipping option would be more natural style and
> > consistent. I think "VACUUM (INDEX_CLEANUP false)" seems consistent
> > with its reloption but not with other vacuum options. So why does only
> > this option (and probably up-coming new options) need to support new
> > style? Do we need the same change to the existing options?
>
> Well, it's too late to change to change DISABLE_PAGE_SKIPPING to work
> some other way; it's been released, and we're stuck with it at this
> point.

Agreed.

> However, I generally believe that it is preferable to phrase
> options positively then negatively, so that for example one writes
> EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, TIMING OFF) not EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, NO_TIMING). So
> I'd like to do it that way for the new options that we're proposing to
> add.

Agreed with using phrase options positively than negatively. Since
DISABLE_PAGE_SKIPPING is an option for emergency we might be able to
rename for consistency in a future release.

Attached updated version patches. 0001 patch can be applied on top of
the patch that allows the all existing options have one boolean
argument, which I've attached on another thread[1]. So please apply
them in following order.

1. v20-0001-All-VACUUM-command-options-allow-an-argument.patch
(attached on [1] thread)
2. v10-0001-Add-INDEX_CLEANUP-option-to-VACUUM-command.patch
3. v10-0002-Add-disable-index-cleanup-option-to-vacuumdb.patch

I kept the --disable-index-cleanup option of vacuumdb command since
perhaps it would be understandable to specify this option rather than
setting true/false as a command line option.

Please review the patches.

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAD21AoBg8CBf1OAse6ESKJmNBon14h3nAR67nJhZ%3DyujA%2BLk4A%40mail.gmail.com

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center

Attachment Content-Type Size
v10-0001-Add-INDEX_CLEANUP-option-to-VACUUM-command.patch text/x-patch 19.9 KB
v10-0002-Add-disable-index-cleanup-option-to-vacuumdb.patch text/x-patch 5.3 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christoph Berg 2019-03-26 15:14:46 Re: Enable data checksums by default
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2019-03-26 15:12:35 Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: multivariate histograms and MCV lists