| From: | "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum |
| Date: | 2022-03-29 12:25:52 |
| Message-ID: | CCF0E7E8-5677-4628-8314-A7727C3E49DA@amazon.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I think that's an absolute no-go. Adding locking to progress reporting,
> particularly a single central lwlock, is going to *vastly* increase the
> overhead incurred by progress reporting.
Sorry for the late reply.
The usage of the shared memory will be limited
to PARALLEL maintenance operations. For now,
it will only be populated for parallel vacuums.
Autovacuum for example will not be required to
populate this shared memory.
Regards,
---
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-03-29 12:28:14 | Re: unlogged sequences |
| Previous Message | Imseih (AWS), Sami | 2022-03-29 12:08:45 | Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum |