From: | Tatsuro Yamada <yamada(dot)tatsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com, thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: CLUSTER command progress monitor |
Date: | 2017-09-06 06:58:26 |
Message-ID: | 59AF9C92.4080904@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Hackers,
I revised the patch like this:
- Add "command" column in the view
It tells that the running command is CLUSTER or VACUUM FULL.
- Enable VACUUM FULL progress monitor
Add heap_tuples_vacuumed and heap_tuples_recently_dead as a counter in the view.
Sequence of phases are below:
1. scanning heap
5. swapping relation files
6. rebuild index
7. performing final cleanup
I didn't change the name of view (pg_stat_progress_cluster) because I'm not sure
whether the new name (pg_stat_progress_reorg) is suitable or not.
Any comments or suggestion are welcome.
Thanks,
Tatsuro Yamada
On 2017/09/04 20:17, Tatsuro Yamada wrote:
> On 2017/09/04 15:38, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Tatsuro Yamada
>> <yamada(dot)tatsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>>> Then I have questions.
>>>
>>> * Should we have separate views for them? Or should both be covered by the
>>> same view with some indication of which command (CLUSTER or VACUUM FULL)
>>> is actually running?
>>
>> Using the same view for both, and tell that this is rather VACUUM or
>> CLUSTER in the view, would be better IMO. Coming up with a name more
>> generic than pg_stat_progress_cluster may be better though if this
>> speaks with VACUUM FULL as well, user-facing documentation does not
>> say that VACUUM FULL is actually CLUSTER.
>
> Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
> Agreed.
> I'll add new column like a "command" to tell whether running CLUSTER or VACUUM.
> And how about this new view name?
> - pg_stat_progress_reorg
> Is it more general name than previous name if it covers both commands?
>
>
>>> I'll add this patch to CF2017-09.
>>> Any comments or suggestion are welcome.
>>
>> Nice to see that you are taking the time to implement patches for
>> upstream, Yamada-san!
>
> Same here. :)
> I'd like to contribute creating feature that is for DBA and users.
> Progress monitoring feature is important from my DBA experiences.
> I'm happy if you lend your hand.
>
> Thanks,
> Tatsuro Yamada
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
progress_monitor_cluster_v3.patch | text/x-patch | 21.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2017-09-06 07:01:14 | Re: pgbench: Skipping the creating primary keys after initialization |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-09-06 06:51:14 | Re: cache lookup errors for missing replication origins |