From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Rahila Syed <rahila(dot)syed(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: monitoring CREATE INDEX [CONCURRENTLY]
Date: 2019-03-11 19:43:22
Message-ID: 20190311194322.GA30783@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-Mar-11, Robert Haas wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 3:26 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > Oh. That's easily removed. Though I have to say that other people said
> > that they liked it so much that they would have liked to have it in the
> > original VACUUM one too (5ba2b281-9c84-772a-cf37-17780d782936(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp).
> Huh. Well, that's another option, but then what do we do if the
> number of phases is not a constant?

Well, why do we care? "Some phases might be skipped".

Álvaro Herrera
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2019-03-11 19:47:12 Re: proposal: variadic argument support for least, greatest function
Previous Message Andres Freund 2019-03-11 19:37:46 Re: Pluggable Storage - Andres's take