Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kcIdj-0001lg-A1 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 01:40:07 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kcIdi-0001fU-9J for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 01:40:06 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kcIdi-0001fN-2W for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 01:40:06 +0000 Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kcIdf-0002MH-V1 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 01:40:05 +0000 Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B1B75C0209; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 20:40:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 09 Nov 2020 20:40:03 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=paquier.xyz; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm3; bh=ELZ4Dq9iuBaI7wUf29ckQGnc51E 3Fd/rHu6JCvZlmg0=; b=YnSyRcB+I1fZ+7q7pnRWQRJEvb7MEAqoevqenKIdqhz RCT5qtq1prpSuhzvCT1uSGyvSVALmYK/SJb41sJAIRwUCW0TeXDAeJCpXcxukt6B yw15bHtNuYGRx7hN9M6N+G8PEqVOmlPeGAveZsrS791aVN3vkEiHthQfJfVgt6B0 MZuuhY45NBeUiwD9R6p6Nx5D0iXCYrzxVEZ+AIxXBHgjJ1qP04w/ZfKnAmkU+kGX XJcOg3FVxbRrUjUS4a/3y9WJ3xTkGz9k6QbhJwzX6V3CwUMAwHfd1hSDafGSB8KK 2Q9Um6w1IhORDeRxaCb3oItbBK7Bseu8KkeuvkP499A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=ELZ4Dq 9iuBaI7wUf29ckQGnc51E3Fd/rHu6JCvZlmg0=; b=cgs0bE76T4HLQ5OT/GMkTq wxbl9PAig2hMkVEuLN4uj4tbzjz5r6WhRPpjoLGAbK55ABGTAYWPeX1OZw3D9IqU 23IbX0K9kaQawsWRhWcUsMF8GLvChLSk9vApOP+jVjgvLkjrx499H/T0Q9Vqiwb4 x7lXqCIR2ZqqeOnuB04HXw0JnppNV2OTyP5oi3f1nyWjQNbgynDWEvIYpZE/eaHG ncjkYDso3NbA4poc09GtHpXWcWuMVz0rP+4+qYkz5+pz5pQQ4AGh4USd90FJcBQo Nt/AJqHbVX9hcQUgbLTMtcqGc8b+KxbAC90p3I5hiJiSjpwJRYmmy0pXCgXEwQqg == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrudduiedgfeekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne gfrhhlucfvnfffucdljedtmdenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesghdtreertddt vdenucfhrhhomhepofhitghhrggvlhcurfgrqhhuihgvrhcuoehmihgthhgrvghlsehprg hquhhivghrrdighiiiqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedvgeduuefhtdeuleettdevjeeh heeiveeuieegleetgeeljeelieeuieehgeevhfenucfkphepudduuddruddtvddrudektd drudekheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhm pehmihgthhgrvghlsehprghquhhivghrrdighiii X-ME-Proxy: Received: from paquier.xyz (ee0822lan1.rev.em-net.ne.jp [111.102.180.185]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 8BDB43063080; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 20:40:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:39:57 +0900 From: Michael Paquier To: Tom Lane Cc: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera , James Coleman , Pg Hackers Subject: Re: remove spurious CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY wait Message-ID: <20201110013957.GD1887@paquier.xyz> References: <20200819181646.GA1559@alvherre.pgsql> <20200820060929.GB3730@paquier.xyz> <20201103181447.54ctwnfdt5wztbqn@localhost> <20201109154743.sij6j5ue3j673r7h@localhost> <20201110012826.GC1887@paquier.xyz> <2087667.1604971933@sss.pgh.pa.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="wULyF7TL5taEdwHz" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2087667.1604971933@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk --wULyF7TL5taEdwHz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 08:32:13PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Do we really need exclusive lock on the ProcArray to make this flag > change? That seems pretty bad from a concurrency standpoint. Any place where we update vacuumFlags acquires an exclusive LWLock on ProcArrayLock. That's held for a very short time, so IMO it won't matter much in practice, particularly if you compare that with the potential gains related to the existing wait phases. -- Michael --wULyF7TL5taEdwHz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEG72nH6vTowiyblFKnvQgOdbyQH0FAl+p720ACgkQnvQgOdby QH0o/A/+Kxpw6m+lEU/n/9yH8QpO5PKo/gC1dUKvayS/l9O4455usi31wdCsnt9a kdJ10z8GQAC/6hg7Cdbafh2nQEg6Vr9TtXcxEqWwDyOrRunt08Z3fsQRVzmiVKTl JgU/zeyjcdWcmc/qiGigOQWsYMthWqmntRf53RvNrSfUjkLoE8Xu0jxKc6OMW/Kb 3KqtALWP5hE/ehAJyZ47VyiWz+bb8FgWSQMpKmc/BUuSDHdccukhp6EXbrTBwwLz iUuHAS2EF9fIk14pXETkVwN3LA0HCkF4RuUtuFpSmUIqXjRWjj7gweMSErjZxbMZ jExn1mwIqgMecBjAO0yeMvkC0qL3gnaC2R7KmwMT7Wwy52DSgBtEPSaj0EZx1Sq1 O2YMi3hhXVxme1++i9KwsVRz6XpIJl5BquiwesLQQKMRPlCeyC+r0dj0xLQpwznp HFI+dFiIG7CHDuUIu2/xzKIlq4RnnpgDf77gi1NUJtaVONPJRiJ8GY+SzE9wsq70 GzvkTFVYvTlFog+FIkEurxfqnk3lIOIUsCEHex6u+TB31fsopcx8R5qm6pmr4qcf 4zDi60L+z7M5JcgLhZ3yPYp8YnpRrz9mHZYKvnSYTGJrDrlVNstBX+UkL0y8W+5z hqzEZ7xZc5PRrttO7ZguiwpEGSgK58LyVmNFGJ2As6EGJffnWvk= =/KB3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --wULyF7TL5taEdwHz--