Re: pg_stat_progress_basebackup - progress reporting for pg_basebackup, in the server side

From: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_stat_progress_basebackup - progress reporting for pg_basebackup, in the server side
Date: 2020-02-06 02:07:22
Message-ID: CA+HiwqGriz_GLqOpnHe5jn08v6WVgx+K9pMAfvk8wgUDySDygQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 9:51 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
<horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 18:25 Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > So, maybe you're saying that "waiting for checkpoint" is ambiguous and
> > > most people will assume it means "...to start". As for me, I assume
> > > it ends with "...to finish".
>
> I'm not sure "most peple will assume" or not, so I said "I'm not
> sure". For example, I feel strangeness to use "I'm waiting for Amit"
> to express that I'm waiting Amit to leave there. That phrase gives me
> such kind of uneasiness.
>
> I thought of "establishing checkpoint" or "running a checkpoint" as
> other candidates.

Okay, I understand. I am fine with "running checkpoint", although I
think "waiting for checkpoint" isn't totally wrong either.

Thanks,
Amit

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2020-02-06 02:14:32 typos in comments and user docs
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2020-02-06 01:54:48 Re: Memory-Bounded Hash Aggregation