RE: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb
От | Jamison, Kirk |
---|---|
Тема | RE: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb |
Дата | |
Msg-id | D09B13F772D2274BB348A310EE3027C64137E4@g01jpexmbkw24 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb (Jesper Pedersen <jesper.pedersen@redhat.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb
Re: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, According to CF app, this patch needs review so I took a look at it. Currently, your patch applies and builds cleanly, and all tests are also successful based from the CF bot patch tester. I'm not sure if I have understood the argument raised by Peter correctly. Quoting Peter, "it's not clear that pg_upgrade and vacuumdb are bound the same way, so it's not a given that the same -jnumber should be used." I think it's whether the # jobs for pg_upgrade is used the same way for parallel vacuum. According to the official docs, the recommended setting for pg_upgrade --j option is the maximum of the number of CPU coresand tablespaces. [1] As for vacuumdb, parallel vacuum's (-j) recommended setting is based from your max_connections [2], which is the max # ofconcurrent connections to your db server. [1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/pgupgrade.html [2] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/app-vacuumdb.html Regards, Kirk Jamison
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: