Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables inVACUUM commands
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables inVACUUM commands |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqR2bn2+u7KU+7=49s0dBhj5SxFpgg2xYcYB6dbb75N6HA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables inVACUUM commands ("Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables in VACUUM commands
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:44 AM, Bossart, Nathan <bossartn@amazon.com> wrote: > Alright, I've added logging for autovacuum in v23. I ended up needing to > do a little restructuring to handle the case when the relation was skipped > because the lock could not be obtained. While doing so, I became > convinced that LOG was probably the right level for autovacuum logs. + if (IsAutoVacuumWorkerProcess() && params->log_min_duration >= 0) + elevel = LOG; + else if (!IsAutoVacuumWorkerProcess()) + elevel = WARNING; + else + elevel = 0; OK, of course let's not change the existing log levels. This could be always tuned later on depending on feedback from others. I can see that guc.c also uses elevel == 0 for some logic, so we could rely on that as you do. @@ -116,6 +116,9 @@ analyze_rel(Oid relid, RangeVar *relation, int options, int elevel; AcquireSampleRowsFuncacquirefunc = NULL; BlockNumber relpages = 0; + bool rel_lock; + + Assert(relation != NULL); I can see that this is new in your patch. Definitely adapted. In short, I am switching it back to "ready for committer". We may want the locking issues when building the relation list to be settled first. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: