Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM
| От | Nathan Bossart |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20230306211337.GA3076909@nathanxps13 обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM (Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: add PROCESS_MAIN to VACUUM
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 03:48:28PM -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote: > On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 3:27 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 02:40:09PM -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote: >> > I noticed in vacuum_rel() in vacuum.c where table_relation_vacuum() is >> > called, 4211fbd84 changes the else into an else if [1]. I understand >> > after reading the commit and re-reading the code why that is now, but I >> > was initially confused. I was thinking it might be nice to have a >> > comment mentioning why there is no else case here (i.e. that the main >> > table relation will be vacuumed on the else if branch). >> >> This was a hack to avoid another level of indentation for that whole block >> of code, but based on your comment, it might be better to just surround >> this entire section with an "if (params->options & VACOPT_PROCESS_MAIN)" >> check. WDYT? > > I think that would be clearer. Here's a patch. Thanks for reviewing. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: