Re: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb
От | Jesper Pedersen |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb |
Дата | |
Msg-id | c448acf6-7c38-3d6d-c663-5387ccffb906@redhat.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb ("Jamison, Kirk" <k.jamison@jp.fujitsu.com>) |
Ответы |
RE: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Kirk, On 1/24/19 9:31 PM, Jamison, Kirk wrote: > According to CF app, this patch needs review so I took a look at it. > Currently, your patch applies and builds cleanly, and all tests are also successful > based from the CF bot patch tester. > > I'm not sure if I have understood the argument raised by Peter correctly. > Quoting Peter, "it's not clear that pg_upgrade and vacuumdb are bound the same way, so it's not a given that the same -jnumber should be used." > I think it's whether the # jobs for pg_upgrade is used the same way for parallel vacuum. > > According to the official docs, the recommended setting for pg_upgrade --j option is the maximum of the number of CPU coresand tablespaces. [1] > As for vacuumdb, parallel vacuum's (-j) recommended setting is based from your max_connections [2], which is the max #of concurrent connections to your db server. > Thanks for your feedback ! As per Peter's comments I have changed the patch (v2) to not pass down the -j option to vacuumdb. Only an update to the documentation and console output is made in order to make it more clear. Best regards, Jesper
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: