Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Query progress indication - an implementation

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Scara Maccai <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Query progress indication - an implementation
Date: 2009-06-30 07:48:41
Message-ID: 1246348121.27964.26.camel@dn-x300-willij (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 07:04 +0200, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Le 30 juin 2009 à 01:34, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> a écrit :
> > Basically I disagree that imperfect progress reports annoy users. I
> > think we can do better than reporting 250% done or having a percentage
> > that goes backward though. It would be quite tolerable (though perhaps
> > for no logical reason) to have a progress indicator which slows done
> > as it gets closer to 100% and never seems to make it to 100%.
> I guess bad stats are such an important problem in planning queries  
> that a 250% progress is doing more good than harm in showing users how  
> badly they need to review their analyze related settings.

Yeh, I agree. We can define it as "planned work", rather than actual. So
if the progress bar says 250% and query is still going at least you know
it is doing more work, rather than just being slow at doing the planned

 Simon Riggs 
 PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2009-06-30 08:02:42
Subject: Re: Query progress indication - an implementation
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2009-06-30 07:43:39
Subject: Re: Hello to all postgresql developers :)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group