Commit f6162c02 authored by Peter Geoghegan's avatar Peter Geoghegan

Fix parallel amvacuumcleanup safety bug.

Commit b4af70cb inverted the return value of the function
parallel_processing_is_safe(), but missed the amvacuumcleanup test.
Index AMs that don't support parallel cleanup at all were affected.

The practical consequences of this bug were not very serious.  Hash
indexes are affected, but since they just return the number of blocks
during hashvacuumcleanup anyway, it can't have had much impact.

Author: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAD21AoA-Em+aeVPmBbL_s1V-ghsJQSxYL-i3JP8nTfPiD1wjKw@mail.gmail.com
Backpatch: 14-, where commit b4af70cb appears.
parent 61a86ed5
...@@ -4120,7 +4120,7 @@ parallel_processing_is_safe(Relation indrel, LVShared *lvshared) ...@@ -4120,7 +4120,7 @@ parallel_processing_is_safe(Relation indrel, LVShared *lvshared)
/* Skip, if the index does not support parallel cleanup */ /* Skip, if the index does not support parallel cleanup */
if (((vacoptions & VACUUM_OPTION_PARALLEL_CLEANUP) == 0) && if (((vacoptions & VACUUM_OPTION_PARALLEL_CLEANUP) == 0) &&
((vacoptions & VACUUM_OPTION_PARALLEL_COND_CLEANUP) == 0)) ((vacoptions & VACUUM_OPTION_PARALLEL_COND_CLEANUP) == 0))
return true; return false;
/* /*
* Skip, if the index supports parallel cleanup conditionally, but we * Skip, if the index supports parallel cleanup conditionally, but we
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment