Re: Parallel heap vacuum
От | Melanie Plageman |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Parallel heap vacuum |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAAKRu_a0R=PPXVjBghWN9QOU0noC5_rA4bGbAwiFyO5ASpPHfw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Parallel heap vacuum (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 12:06 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > On 2025-07-22 11:44:29 -0700, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > Do you think it makes sense to implement the above idea that we launch > > parallel vacuum workers for heap through the same vacuumparallel.c > > codebase and maintain the consistent interface with parallel index > > vacuuming APIs? > > Yes, that might make sense. But wiring it up via tableam doesn't make sense. If you do parallel worker setup below heap_vacuum_rel(), then how are you supposed to use those workers to do non-heap table vacuuming? All the code in vacuumparallel.c is invoked from below lazy_scan_heap(), so I don't see how having a vacuumparallel.c-specific callback struct solves the layering violation. It seems like parallel index vacuuming setup would have to be done in vacuum_rel() if we want to reuse the same parallel workers for the table vacuuming and index vacuuming phases and allow for different table AMs to vacuum the tables in their own way using these parallel workers. - Melanie
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: