On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 6:53 AM Masahiko Sawada
<masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 at 22:33, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hmm, I think we should define these flags in the most simple way.
> > Your previous proposal sounds okay to me.
>
> Okay. As you mentioned before, my previous proposal won't work for
> existing index AMs that don't set amparallelvacuumoptions.
>
You mean to say it won't work because it has to set multiple flags
which means that if IndexAm user doesn't set the value of
amparallelvacuumoptions then it won't work?
> But since we
> have amcanparallelvacuum which is false by default I think we don't
> need to worry about backward compatibility problem. The existing index
> AM will use neither parallel bulk-deletion nor parallel cleanup by
> default. When it wants to support parallel vacuum they will set
> amparallelvacuumoptions as well as amcanparallelvacuum.
>
Hmm, I was not thinking of multiple variables rather only one
variable. The default value should indicate that IndexAm doesn't
support a parallel vacuum. It might be that we need to do it the way
I originally proposed the different values of amparallelvacuumoptions
or maybe some variant of it where the default value can clearly say
that IndexAm doesn't support a parallel vacuum.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com