Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.

From: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, pokurev(at)pm(dot)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, bannos(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.
Date: 2016-03-09 01:11:31
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2016/03/09 0:24, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 3:02 AM, Amit Langote
> <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>> Updated versions attached.
>> * changed st_progress_param to int64 and so did the argument of
>> pgstat_progress_update_param(). Likewise changed param1..param10 of
>> pg_stat_get_progress_info()'s output columns to bigint.
>> * Added back the Oid field st_command_target and corresponding function
>> pgstat_progress_set_command_target(Oid).
> What the heck do we have an SQL-visible pg_stat_reset_local_progress()
> for? Surely if we ever need that, it's a bug.

OK, now I am not sure what I was thinking adding that function. Removed.

> I think pgstat_progress_update_param() should Assert(index >= 0 &&
> index < N_PROGRESS_PARAM). But I'd rename N_PROGRESS_PARAM to

Agreed, done.

> Regarding "XXX - privilege check is maybe dubious" - I think the
> privilege check here should match pg_stat_activity. If it does,
> there's nothing dubious about that IMHO.

OK, done. So, it shows pid column to all, while rest of the values -
relid, param1..param10 are only shown to role members. Unlike
pg_stat_activity, there is no text column to stash a "<insufficient
privilege>" message into, so all that's done is to output null values.

The attached revision addresses above and one of Horiguchi-san's comments
in his email yesterday.

Thanks a lot for the review.


Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-Provide-a-way-for-utility-commands-to-report-progres-v5.patch text/x-diff 10.5 KB
0002-WIP-Implement-progress-reporting-for-VACUUM-command-v5.patch text/x-diff 14.0 KB
0003-WIP-Add-a-block-number-argument-to-index-bulk-delete-v5.patch text/x-diff 10.1 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2016-03-09 01:12:24 Re: Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()
Previous Message Amit Langote 2016-03-09 00:57:20 Re: Declarative partitioning