Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums

From: Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>
To: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <bernd(dot)helmle(at)credativ(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums
Date: 2018-12-25 16:29:06
Message-ID: 1545755346.19674.1.camel@credativ.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

Am Dienstag, den 25.12.2018, 12:12 +0100 schrieb Fabien COELHO:
> > Given the speed of verifying checksums and its storage-oriented status, I
> > also still think that a (possibly fractional) MB (1,000,000 bytes), or even
> > GB, is the right unit to use for reporting this progress. On my laptop (SSD),
> > verifying runs at least at 1.26 GB/s (on one small test), there is no point
> > in displaying kilobytes progress.
>
> Obviously the file is cached by the system at such speed, but still most
> disks should provides dozens of MB per second of read bandwidth. If GB is
> used, it should use fractional display (eg 1.25 GB) though.

I think MB indeed makes more sense than kB, so I have changed that now
in V7, per attached.

Michael

--
Michael Banck
Projektleiter / Senior Berater
Tel.: +49 2166 9901-171
Fax: +49 2166 9901-100
Email: michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de

credativ GmbH, HRB Mönchengladbach 12080
USt-ID-Nummer: DE204566209
Trompeterallee 108, 41189 Mönchengladbach
Geschäftsführung: Dr. Michael Meskes, Jörg Folz, Sascha Heuer

Unser Umgang mit personenbezogenen Daten unterliegt
folgenden Bestimmungen: https://www.credativ.de/datenschutz

Attachment Content-Type Size
pg_verify_checksums_progress_V6.patch text/x-patch 8.5 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2018-12-25 18:03:12 Re: Feature: triggers on materialized views
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2018-12-25 15:38:39 Re: Alternative to \copy in psql modelled after \g