Re: pgsql: Allow vacuum command to process indexes in parallel.
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgsql: Allow vacuum command to process indexes in parallel. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1+JtO6MRZZrYAUi790c20DoH94=fiskt_ok9cjuaDcnjA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgsql: Allow vacuum command to process indexes in parallel. (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgsql: Allow vacuum command to process indexes in parallel.
|
Список | pgsql-committers |
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 4:18 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > > 2076 > > 2077 if ((shared_balance >= VacuumCostLimit) && > > >>> CID ...: Incorrect expression (UNINTENDED_INTEGER_DIVISION) > > >>> Dividing integer expressions "VacuumCostLimit" and "nworkers", and then converting the integer quotient to type"double". Any remainder, or fractional part of the quotient, is ignored. > > 2078 (VacuumCostBalanceLocal > 0.5 * (VacuumCostLimit / nworkers))) > > 2079 { > > 2080 /* Compute sleep time based on the local cost balance */ > > 2081 msec = VacuumCostDelay * VacuumCostBalanceLocal / VacuumCostLimit; > > 2082 pg_atomic_sub_fetch_u32(VacuumSharedCostBalance, VacuumCostBalanceLocal); > > 2083 VacuumCostBalanceLocal = 0; > > Which seems like a fair enough complaint? > Yeah, how can we set up and test a fix for this? Where can I see these results? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления: