pg.ddx.io pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
To: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Cc: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrey M. Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>
Subject: Re: Confine vacuum skip logic to lazy_scan_skip
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2024 07:49:44 -0700
Message-ID: <20240707144944.58.nmisch@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAKRu_bbkmwAzSBgnezancgJeXrQZXy4G4kBTd+5=cr86H5yew@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAKRu_b9kbXeK05_jTqBayhsRNeruyWHD6i8RPWoVtGxSV4D9g@mail.gmail.com>
<CALDaNm3y-kxuJzgqHrJUVO-B=JPE3tXJazoowEkKL745aZH6Zw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAKRu_ZuYsf4MNGzm7_KvG0SKsu-EtYRhFHy2x3q0heX8KLMTg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAKRu_bQgf4e9OveCQX++zTEJLKbZbqLeapA7SNkNuMjxcCO1w@mail.gmail.com>
<20240306234733.nd4a636colxkgq2e@liskov>
<CAAKRu_aiaf+CufVA5Rrksz4Lw2fvZ3M-OgdBZ8WpzvYoQY96MQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+hUKGKHb3i8Wy72VCKZGA2B5djoj7tAzYAzbeS=Gwr_SdhgRw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAKRu_byDppRvNJ+p5kq-SmXZDQuL6L8N6D06pHbO6WnBnanWQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+hUKGLY4Q4ZY4f1rvnFtv6+PkjNf8MejdPkcju3Qii9DYqqcQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAKRu_bbkmwAzSBgnezancgJeXrQZXy4G4kBTd+5=cr86H5yew@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 05:36:25PM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> I've attached a WIP v11 streaming vacuum patch set here that is
> rebased over master (by Thomas), so that I could add a CF entry for
> it. It still has the problem with the extra WAL write and fsync calls
> investigated by Thomas above. Thomas has some work in progress doing
> streaming write-behind to alleviate the issues with the buffer access
> strategy and streaming reads. When he gets a version of that ready to
> share, he will start a new "Streaming Vacuum" thread.
To avoid reviewing the wrong patch, I'm writing to verify the status here.
This is Needs Review in the commitfest. I think one of these two holds:
1. Needs Review is valid.
2. It's actually Waiting on Author. You're commissioning a review of the
future-thread patch, not this one.
If it's (1), given the WIP marking, what is the scope of the review you seek?
I'm guessing performance is out of scope; what else is in or out of scope?
view thread (81+ messages) latest in thread
Message-ID: <20240707144944.58.nmisch@google.com>
Permalink: ../20240707144944.58.nmisch@google.com/
Also on: postgresql.org/message-id/20240707144944.58.nmisch@google.com
reply
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: noah@leadboat.com, melanieplageman@gmail.com, thomas.munro@gmail.com, vignesh21@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de, hlinnaka@iki.fi, byavuz81@gmail.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, x4mmm@yandex-team.ru
Subject: Re: Confine vacuum skip logic to lazy_scan_skip
In-Reply-To: <20240707144944.58.nmisch@google.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