| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum |
| Date: | 2023-04-09 23:14:18 |
| Message-ID: | ZDNGylfBEFPHwxgD@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 07, 2023 at 12:01:17PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Why would it mean that? Parallel workers are updated together with the leader,
> so there's no compatibility issue?
My point is that the callback system would still need to be maintained
in a stable branch, and, while useful, it could be used for much more
than it is originally written. I guess that this could be used in
custom nodes with their own custom parallel nodes.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-04-09 23:31:21 | Re: Non-replayable WAL records through overflows and >MaxAllocSize lengths |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-04-09 22:32:07 | Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum |