| From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: maintenance_work_mem = 64kB doesn't work for vacuum |
| Date: | 2025-03-18 06:34:01 |
| Message-ID: | CAD21AoCtd7MrgsZrWfvKj9CtFGyJd_G3N1uU3aRE0hqJU8_=6w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 7:06 PM David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 at 05:49, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I've attached the patch. I added the minimum regression tests for that.
>
> I think the change to vacuumlazy.c is ok. The new test you've added
> creates a table called pvactst2 but then adds a test that uses the
> pvactst table.
Fixed.
> Did you mean to skip the DROP TABLE pvactst2;?
Yes, added DROP TABLE pvactst2.
> Is there a reason to keep the maintenance_work_mem=64 for the
> subsequent existing test?
No, I reset it immediately after tests for pvactst2.
I've attached the updated patch.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v2-0001-Fix-assertion-failure-in-parallel-vacuum-with-min.patch | application/octet-stream | 5.6 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2025-03-18 06:37:16 | Re: Adding a '--clean-publisher-objects' option to 'pg_createsubscriber' utility. |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2025-03-18 06:30:04 | Re: pgsql: Avoid invalidating all RelationSyncCache entries on publication |