Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum

From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com>
Cc: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum
Date: 2022-01-12 07:44:37
Message-ID: CAD21AoCWFyvtf_EHHLWqejDjW0=apRugn_=UkpGzY5OgKhkH2g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

(We had better avoid top-posting[1])

On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 10:01 AM Imseih (AWS), Sami <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I agree, Renaming "index_vacuum_count" can be taken up in a separate discussion.
>
> I have attached the 3rd revision of the patch which also includes the documentation changes. Also attached is a rendered html of the docs for review.

Thank you for updating the patch!

Regarding the new pg_stat_progress_vacuum_index view, why do we need
to have a separate view? Users will have to check two views. If this
view is expected to be used together with and joined to
pg_stat_progress_vacuum, why don't we provide one view that has full
information from the beginning? Especially, I think it's not useful
that the total number of indexes to vacuum (num_indexes_to_vacuum
column) and the current number of indexes that have been vacuumed
(index_ordinal_position column) are shown in separate views.

Also, I’m not sure how useful index_tuples_removed is; what can we
infer from this value (without a total number)?

Regards,

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Top-posting

--
Masahiko Sawada
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Borisov 2022-01-12 07:58:24 Re: [PATCH] Improve amcheck to also check UNIQUE constraint in btree index.
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2022-01-12 07:39:03 Re: Time to drop plpython2?