Re: parallel vacuum - few questions on docs, comments and code

From: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: parallel vacuum - few questions on docs, comments and code
Date: 2021-05-13 15:30:26
Message-ID: CALj2ACWGB9oHCR5ygkc8u6_QDqecObf9j2MxtOgsjZMMKsLj=Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 7:00 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > Yeah, I get it. Even if users don't specify a parallel option there
> > > are chances that parallelism is picked. So the parallel degree is the
> > > final number of workers that are chosen by the server for vacuuming
> > > indexes. And, I think that parallel degree is something internal to
> > > the server, and it's better we replace it in the vacuumdb.sgml, change
> > > PARALLEL_DEGREE to PARALLEL_WORKERS in vacuumdb.c and change the error
> > > message "parallel vacuum degree must be a non-negative integer" to
> > > "parallel workers for vacuum must be greater than or equal to zero".
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
>
> I'm fine with this change.

Thanks.

> is important here but another idea to improve the error message would
> be to change "parallel vacuum degree must be between 0 and %d” to "the
> number of parallel workers must be between 0 and %d” (or using
> “parallel workers for vacuum” instead of “the number of parallel
> workers”) while leaving another message as it is.

Done that way.

PSA patch.

With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment Content-Type Size
v1-0001-Parallel-Vacuum-Reword-Error-Messages-and-Docs.patch application/x-patch 3.7 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Maciek Sakrejda 2021-05-13 15:32:50 Re: compute_query_id and pg_stat_statements
Previous Message Tom Lane 2021-05-13 15:25:23 Re: OOM in spgist insert