Re: Parallel heap vacuum

On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 5:14 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Given that we have only about one month until the feature freeze, I
> find that it's realistic to introduce either one parallelism for PG18
> and at least we might want to implement the one first that is more
> beneficial and helpful for users. Since we found that parallel phase
> III is not very efficient in many cases, I'm thinking that in terms of
> PG18 development, we might want to switch focus to parallel phase I,
> and then go for phase III if we have time.

Okay, well let me know how I can be helpful. Should I be reviewing a
version that is already posted?

- Melanie