| From: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Ilya Gladyshev <ilya(dot)v(dot)gladyshev(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Progress report of CREATE INDEX for nested partitioned tables |
| Date: | 2023-01-18 15:25:35 |
| Message-ID: | 20230118152535.GZ9837@telsasoft.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
TBH, I think the best approach is what I did in:
0001-report-top-parent-progress-for-CREATE-INDEX.txt
That's a minimal patch, ideal for backpatching.
..which defines/clarifies that the progress reporting is only for
*direct* children. That avoids the need to change any data structures,
and it's what was probably intended by the original patch, which doesn't
seem to have considered intermediate partitioned tables.
I think it'd be fine to re-define that in some future release, to allow
showing indirect children (probably only "leaves", and not intermediate
partitioned tables). Or "total_bytes" or other global progress.
--
Justin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Isaac Morland | 2023-01-18 15:27:46 | Re: Remove source code display from \df+? |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2023-01-18 15:07:33 | Re: [DOCS] Stats views and functions not in order? |