| From: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel vacuum: check XID wraparound failsafe between indexes |
| Date: | 2026-11-04 16:53:02 |
| Message-ID: | CALj2ACXhucskbDJeYTMH9K9R5xVephfdO20KshQtBxmCYJQqOw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 4:53 PM Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 28 Oct 2026, Bharath Rupireddy
> <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Yeah, that's a good point. parallel_vacuum_bulkdel_all_indexes() can
> > return whether the failsafe was hit by either the leader or any of the
> > workers. Would something like the below work for you?
>
> yes, that looks good to me.
Thanks. I still think it's better for
parallel_vacuum_bulkdel_all_indexes() to return whether it processed
all the indexes or some. Although I'm a bit worried that changing the
return type of the function could impact anyone reusing parallel
vacuum code from the core, this is not a complex change to adopt. So,
I did that in the attached v3 patch. Please have a look.
--
Bharath Rupireddy
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v3-0001-Check-XID-wraparound-failsafe-between-indexes-in-.patch | application/octet-stream | 18.9 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zsolt Parragi | 2026-11-04 17:12:36 | Re: Preferred way to submit a very large batch of bugs? |
| Previous Message | Álvaro Herrera | 2026-11-04 16:48:24 | Re: Preferred way to submit a very large batch of bugs? |