Re: [PATCH v1] Add vacuum_delay_point() to GiST empty-page deletion pass

From: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
To: Paul Kim <mok03127(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers mailing list <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] Add vacuum_delay_point() to GiST empty-page deletion pass
Date: 2026-07-21 12:11:51
Message-ID: E247CECB-A817-44AF-9761-D801CDC14BEE@yandex-team.ru
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 21 Jul 2026, at 15:02, Paul Kim <mok03127(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> The attached patch adds a single vacuum_delay_point(false) at the top of
> the loop, where no buffer lock is held, matching the sibling idiom. The
> function has lacked the call since it was introduced in 7df159a620b.

Yup, this looks like an oversight.

>
> This is long-standing rather than a recent regression, so I'll leave the
> question of back-patching to a committer. Note that on branches before
> 18 vacuum_delay_point() takes no argument (the bool was added by
> e5b0b0ce150), so a back-patch would drop the "false".

I don't know whether we should back-patch this. But I think the decision
should be aligned with the similar one in your GIN thread [0].

Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

[0] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/178447127453.110.12276981925360691905%40mail.gmail.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthias van de Meent 2026-07-21 12:24:13 Re: Unexpected behavior after OOM errors
Previous Message Noah Misch 2026-07-21 12:05:51 Re: ri_Fast* crash w/ nullable UNIQUE constraint