RE: parallel vacuum comments

From: "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Subject: RE: parallel vacuum comments
Date: 2021-12-14 02:23:14
Message-ID: OS0PR01MB57163B2742F6EA9FCD0A6FA294759@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tuesday, December 14, 2021 10:11 AM Tang, Haiying wrote:
> On Monday, December 13, 2021 2:12 PM Masahiko Sawada
> <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I've attached the patch. I've just moved some functions back but not
> > done other changes.
> >
>
> Thanks for your patch.
>
> I tested your patch and tried some cases, like large indexes, different types of
> indexes, it worked well.

+1, the patch looks good to me.

Best regards,
Hou zj

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2021-12-14 02:28:18 Re: Failed transaction statistics to measure the logical replication progress
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2021-12-14 02:14:25 Re: Assertion failure with replication origins and PREPARE TRANSACTIOn