Should vacuum process config file reload more often
От | Melanie Plageman |
---|---|
Тема | Should vacuum process config file reload more often |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAAKRu_ZngzqnEODc7LmS1NH04Kt6Y9huSjz5pp7+DXhrjDA0gw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Should vacuum process config file reload more often
Re: Should vacuum process config file reload more often |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, Users may wish to speed up long-running vacuum of a large table by decreasing autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay/vacuum_cost_delay, however the config file is only reloaded between tables (for autovacuum) or after the statement (for explicit vacuum). This has been brought up for autovacuum in [1]. Andres suggested that it might be possible to check ConfigReloadPending in vacuum_delay_point(), so I thought I would draft a rough patch and start a discussion. Since vacuum_delay_point() is also called by analyze and we do not want to reload the configuration file if we are in a user transaction, I widened the scope of the in_outer_xact variable in vacuum() and allowed analyze in a user transaction to default to the current configuration file reload cadence in PostgresMain(). I don't think I can set and leave vac_in_outer_xact the way I am doing it in this patch, since I use vac_in_outer_xact in vacuum_delay_point(), which I believe is reachable from codepaths that would not have called vacuum(). It seems that if a backend sets it, the outer transaction commits, and then the backend ends up calling vacuum_delay_point() in a different way later, it wouldn't be quite right. Apart from this, one higher level question I have is if there are other gucs whose modification would make reloading the configuration file during vacuum/analyze unsafe. - Melanie [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/22CA91B4-D341-4075-BD3C-4BAB52AF1E80%40amazon.com#37f05e33d2ce43680f96332fa1c0f3d4
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: