On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 8:08 AM, Simon Riggs <
simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
>
> I've been trying to review this thread with the thought "what does
> this give me?". I am keen to encourage contributions and also keen to
> extend our feature set, but I do not wish to complicate our code base.
> Dilip's developments do seem to be good quality; what I question is
> whether we want this feature.
>
> This patch seems to allow me to run multiple VACUUMs at once. But I
> can already do this, with autovacuum.
>
> Is there anything this patch can do that cannot be already done with autovacuum?
The difference lies in the fact that vacuumdb (or VACUUM) gives
the option to user to control the vacuum activity for cases when
autovacuum doesn't suffice the need, one of the example is to perform
vacuum via vacuumdb after pg_upgrade or some other maintenance
activity (as mentioned by Jeff upthread). So I think in all such cases
having parallel option can give benefit in terms of performance which
is already shown by Dilip upthread by running some tests (with and
without patch).