On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl> wrote:
>>> That would make such a truncation less frequent, and after all a truncated display is not
>>> particular useful.
>
>> Agreed - it's useful during testing, but not in a typical production
>> use. It might actually be more useful if it's truncated in in the
>> other end (keeping the last 30 instead of the first 30 chars)
>
> +1 for truncating from the left.  I think pg_upgrade already does that
> in its progress messages.

Fixed. I also fixed the output of the size parameter to be a fixed
length, so the whole row doesn't shift left and right depending on how
far long the process is.

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

• Re: small pg_basebackup display bug at 2012-12-16 18:20:53 from Tom Lane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Magnus Hagander	Date: 2013-01-17 14:07:35
	Subject: Re: default SSL compression (was: libpq compression)
Previous:	From: Magnus Hagander	Date: 2013-01-17 13:36:23
	Subject: Re: review: pgbench - aggregation of info written into log