Re: monitoring CREATE INDEX [CONCURRENTLY]

From: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: monitoring CREATE INDEX [CONCURRENTLY]
Date: 2019-02-13 04:20:08
Message-ID: 5ba2b281-9c84-772a-cf37-17780d782936@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019/02/13 11:59, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 at 00:46, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>> Here's a sample
>> concurrent index build on a 100M tuple table.
>
>
> Cool

+1

Looking at the "([phase] x of x)" in the sample output, I thought
pg_stat_progress_vacuum's output should've had it too (not a concern of
Alvaro's patch though.)

Thanks,
Amit

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2019-02-13 04:31:53 Re: monitoring CREATE INDEX [CONCURRENTLY]
Previous Message Richard Guo 2019-02-13 03:45:10 Re: Fast path for empty relids in check_outerjoin_delay()