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

Re: Query progress indication - an implementation

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, 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 05:04:19
Message-ID: 200C9247-E009-43BE-9A36-F7BE738903A5@hi-media.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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.

Regards,
-- 
dim

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2009-06-30 05:33:06
Subject: 8.5 development schedule
Previous:From: Itagaki TakahiroDate: 2009-06-30 04:36:36
Subject: foreign.h is not installed

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group