| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rahila Syed <rahila(dot)syed(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: monitoring CREATE INDEX [CONCURRENTLY] |
| Date: | 2019-03-28 15:27:54 |
| Message-ID: | CANP8+jJLeAfSMRxDFh+XGPBV7EB4+oh1C4y29Swt218LKVixDw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 at 14:56, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
wrote:
> I have not reinstated phase numbers; I have Rahila's positive vote for
> them. Do I hear any more votes on this issue?
>
If there is a specific technical issue, I'd like to understand that more.
If it is just a usability preference, then I say we should have numbers.
Numbering is natural for people. If we say "It's currently doing phase
XYZ", they will say "Is that the 3rd phase?", we'll say "No, actually the
5th", and then they will say "Why didn't you just number them?"
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
<http://www.2ndquadrant.com/>
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-03-28 15:30:15 | Re: pgsql: Compute XID horizon for page level index vacuum on primary. |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-03-28 15:27:27 | Re: pgsql: Compute XID horizon for page level index vacuum on primary. |