Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Amit Kapila
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum
Дата
Msg-id CAA4eK1+W5sMjOX60LLtsOvCsTEVti7Ufm9fE9rCLLnG=YABTVg@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum  (Mahendra Singh Thalor <mahi6run@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum  (Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 4:35 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor
<mahi6run@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Below are some review comments for v50 patch.
>
> 1.
> +LVShared
> +LVSharedIndStats
> +LVParallelState
>  LWLock
>
> I think, LVParallelState should come before LVSharedIndStats.
>
> 2.
> +    /*
> +     * It is possible that parallel context is initialized with fewer workers
> +     * then the number of indexes that need a separate worker in the current
> +     * phase, so we need to consider it.  See compute_parallel_vacuum_workers.
> +     */
>
> This comment is confusing me. I think, "then" should be replaced with "than".
>

Pushed, after fixing these two comments.


-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Amit Kapila
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum
Следующее
От: Andy Fan
Дата:
Сообщение: [PATCH] query rewrite for distinct stage under some cases