Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums

From: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
To: Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <bernd(dot)helmle(at)credativ(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums
Date: 2018-12-25 18:05:30
Message-ID: alpine.DEB.2.21.1812251855370.32444@lancre
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> I think MB indeed makes more sense than kB, so I have changed that now
> in V7, per attached.

You use 1024² bytes. What about 1000000 bytes per MB, as the unit is about
stored files?

Also, you did not answer to my other points:
- use "instr_time.h" for better precision
- invert sizeonly
- reuse a test

--
Fabien.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mitar 2018-12-25 18:26:56 Re: Feature: triggers on materialized views
Previous Message David Fetter 2018-12-25 18:03:12 Re: Feature: triggers on materialized views