On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote:
> It allows multiple vacuum processes to be initiated from vacuumdb at
> the same time (i.e. in parallel), although not for the same tables.
> What do you propose would be more appropriate?
"Parallel vacuumdb jobs" seems better. I have seen cases where the
existing wording caused confusion.
I think that we will probably have actual parallel vacuum within the
next couple of releases (probably vacuuming multiple indexes at the
same time, using a list of TIDs in shared memory). The messaging here
is important.
--
Regards,
Peter Geoghegan