| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rahila Syed <rahila(dot)syed(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: monitoring CREATE INDEX [CONCURRENTLY] |
| Date: | 2019-03-11 19:57:03 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoatvC9v2gBHOKtwdchaAfbDo1PiBxxqEzBEyCk65VR59Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 3:43 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > Huh. Well, that's another option, but then what do we do if the
> > number of phases is not a constant?
>
> Well, why do we care? "Some phases might be skipped".
It seems pretty confusing. I mean, in the case of the CLUSTER patch,
you're either going to seq-scan the table or index-scan the table.
Those are (at last check) reported using different phase numbers, but
they are mutually exclusive. Generally, if you are going to do either
foo -> bar -> baz -> quux or foo -> bletch -> quux, how many phases
are there total? 5? 4?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Darafei Praliaskouski | 2019-03-11 20:22:18 | Re: Compressed TOAST Slicing |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2019-03-11 19:47:12 | Re: proposal: variadic argument support for least, greatest function |