From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Mahendra Singh Thalor <mahi6run@gmail.com>
Cc: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
Cc: Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: doc review for parallel vacuum
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 03:30:15 -0500
Message-ID: <20200413083015.GQ2228@telsasoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA4eK1JoYKBcAJ5sgvbwGFwyu1Jr6faQqa8nn8tQuuewmpXs-Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20200322021801.GB2563@telsasoft.com>
<CAA4eK1Jwqq2=pukH212AvyWv6_oOJxM2YAypOEzR1KgeJj8_BQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAA4eK1+V5QovVH49=9RhsrshoNAA+TZBVGrv30xAqG0ncPUQaQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20200407045551.GI2228@telsasoft.com>
<CA+fd4k74vmiU=KdEjLJU4UQ99UvLn0mp-CKTkiF=bUdyk2PUNA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAA4eK1JwUXkV4T2uAiLDYHT3efqkX2gE+Z5Z8g-DgCw377LN_g@mail.gmail.com>
<20200410134644.GB2228@telsasoft.com>
<CAA4eK1JoYKBcAJ5sgvbwGFwyu1Jr6faQqa8nn8tQuuewmpXs-Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 10:44:42AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 7:16 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > Also, this part still doesn't read well:
> >
> > - * amvacuumcleanup to the DSM segment if it's the first time to get it?
> > - * from them? because they? allocate it locally and it's possible that an
> > - * index will be vacuumed by the different vacuum process at the next
> >
> > If you change "it" and "them" and "it" and say "*a* different", then it'll be
> > ok.
> >
>
> I am not sure if I follow how exactly you want to change it but still
> let me know what you think about if we change it like: "Copy the index
> bulk-deletion result returned from ambulkdelete and amvacuumcleanup to
> the DSM segment if it's the first time because they allocate locally
> and it's possible that an index will be vacuumed by the different
> vacuum process at the next time."
I changed "the" to "a" and removed "at":
|Copy the index
|bulk-deletion result returned from ambulkdelete and amvacuumcleanup to
|the DSM segment if it's the first time [???] because they allocate locally
|and it's possible that an index will be vacuumed by a different
|vacuum process the next time."
Is it correct to say: "..if it's the first iteration" and "different process on
the next iteration" ? Or "cycle" ?
--
Justin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: pryzby@telsasoft.com, amit.kapila16@gmail.com, masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com, mahi6run@gmail.com, dilipbalaut@gmail.com, sk@zsrv.org
Subject: Re: doc review for parallel vacuum
In-Reply-To: <20200413083015.GQ2228@telsasoft.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox