Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

From: Mahendra Singh Thalor <mahi6run(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <langote_amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum
Date: 2020-01-13 18:20:41
Message-ID: CAKYtNApV5NfzKdZ3U0yBi2KHh-KeJk0rZatqm4YKt1UG0o98LQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 at 15:51, Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org> wrote:
>
> Hi
> Thank you for update! I looked again
>
> (vacuum_indexes_leader)
> + /* Skip the indexes that can be processed by parallel workers */
> + if (!skip_index)
> + continue;
>
> Does the variable name skip_index not confuse here? Maybe rename to something like can_parallel?
>

Again I looked into code and thought that somehow if we can add a
boolean flag(can_parallel) in IndexBulkDeleteResult structure to
identify that this index is supporting parallel vacuum or not, then it
will be easy to skip those indexes and multiple time we will not call
skip_parallel_vacuum_index (from vacuum_indexes_leader and
parallel_vacuum_index)
We can have a linked list of non-parallel supported indexes, then
directly we can pass to vacuum_indexes_leader.

Ex: let suppose we have 5 indexes into a table. If before launching
parallel workers, if we can add boolean flag(can_parallel)
IndexBulkDeleteResult structure to identify that this index is
supporting parallel vacuum or not.
Let index 1, 4 are not supporting parallel vacuum so we already have
info in a linked list that 1->4 are not supporting parallel vacuum, so
parallel_vacuum_index will process these indexes and rest will be
processed by parallel workers. If parallel worker found that
can_parallel is false, then it will skip that index.

As per my understanding, if we implement this, then we can avoid
multiple function calling of skip_parallel_vacuum_index and if there
is no index which can't performe parallel vacuum, then we will not
call vacuum_indexes_leader as head of list pointing to null. (we can
save unnecessary calling of vacuum_indexes_leader)

Thoughts?

--
Thanks and Regards
Mahendra Singh Thalor
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2020-01-13 18:40:19 Re: Removing pg_pltemplate and creating "trustable" extensions
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2020-01-13 16:34:37 Re: BUG #16059: Tab-completion of filenames in COPY commands removes required quotes