Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum

From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yura Sokolov <y(dot)sokolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum
Date: 2023-01-30 04:08:17
Message-ID: CAFiTN-tAB2on9RSPFtexsxypFrShG-SAaH+9ja3Kw871tBsK0A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 12:39 PM John Naylor
<john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 1:17 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 6:00 PM John Naylor
> > <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Attached is a rebase to fix conflicts from recent commits.
> >
> > I have reviewed v22-0022* patch and I have some comments.
> >
> > 1.
> > >It also changes to the column names max_dead_tuples and num_dead_tuples and to
> > >show the progress information in bytes.
> >
> > I think this statement needs to be rephrased.
>
> Could you be more specific?

I mean the below statement in the commit message doesn't look
grammatically correct to me.

"It also changes to the column names max_dead_tuples and
num_dead_tuples and to show the progress information in bytes."

--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Smith 2023-01-30 04:12:34 Re: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply
Previous Message vignesh C 2023-01-30 03:50:10 Re: Deadlock between logrep apply worker and tablesync worker