| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tatsuro Yamada <yamada(dot)tatsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] CLUSTER command progress monitor |
| Date: | 2019-03-06 14:52:43 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYr99tHCSunH7-XCBPH-ZqFdK9syOsWiCfV6PyBHO4DxA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 8:03 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> One, err, small issue with that idea is that we need the param numbers
> not to conflict for any "progress update providers" that are to be used
> simultaneously by any command.
Is that really an issue? I think progress reporting -- at least with
the current infrastructure -- is only ever going to be possible for
utility commands, not queries. And those really shouldn't have very
many sorts going on at once.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Georgios Kokolatos | 2019-03-06 14:54:52 | Re: Tighten error control for OpenTransientFile/CloseTransientFile |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2019-03-06 14:47:19 | Re: openLogOff is not needed anymore |