| From: | "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Andres Freund" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, 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>, Lyes Ameddah <lyes(dot)amd(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Add SKIP LOCKED to VACUUM and ANALYZE |
| Date: | 2018-07-29 22:56:24 |
| Message-ID: | D6AB2D2C-DE0F-46EA-A646-2445A4D7BDA5@amazon.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/24/18, 8:07 PM, "Michael Paquier" <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> Hm... I have not imagined this part but adding a new layer is sort of
> ugly, and an extra one would be needed for CLUSTER as well, in which
> case adding cluster-related logs into vacuum.c introduces a circular
> dependency with cluster.c. What about just skipping this refactoring
> and move to the point where CLUSTER also gains its log queries directly
> in cluster_rel? VACUUM FULL is also not going to run for autovacuum, so
> that's less confusion with IsAutoVacuumWorkerProcess().
Since vacuum_rel() already obtains an AccessExclusiveLock on the
relation for VACUUM FULL, we might be able to skip altering
cluster_rel(). I think we will need to alter it if we are going to
add SKIP LOCKED to CLUSTER, though.
Nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2018-07-29 22:58:39 | Re: Covering GiST indexes |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2018-07-29 21:49:54 | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Append implementation |