From: Manu <manuelreyesbravo@gmail.com>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>,
 Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik@postgres.ai>,
 Zsolt Parragi <zsolt.parragi@percona.com>, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: autovacuum: automatically propagate updated parameters
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 19:03:24 -0300
Message-ID: <179037380436.2378773.9309414664849248903@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CALj2ACUBkuGeS8m+o_5OzrTOtf=NhekVJ8PLS5yNTyHYnH0jpg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CALj2ACUBkuGeS8m+o_5OzrTOtf=NhekVJ8PLS5yNTyHYnH0jpg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/179037380436.2378773.9309414664849248903%40gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm fine leaving 0002 here for the record, since I haven't
> reviewed it in depth and I don't think it has had a close review yet,

I ran v3 0001+0002 on REL_19_STABLE (407687a0fb1), with assertions and
injection points.  001_parallel_autovacuum.pl and
003_cost_reload_while_waiting.pl passed 10 runs out of 10.

As a control I removed only the SetLatch() loop that 0001 adds to
autovac_recalculate_workers_for_balance().  Then test 5 in 001 times
out waiting for parallel-autovacuum-leader-cost-updated, while 003
still passes.  So 003 covers the reload path and test 5 the rebalance
path, each on its own.

The opposite case, a worker leaving the balance while the leader
waits, is not covered.  I tried a test for it and could not make it
deterministic: with autovacuum_naptime = 1s the launcher starts other
workers, and one of them joining the balance wakes the leader too, so
the test passed even with the launcher's wakeup removed.

Regards,
Manu