| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de, thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums |
| Date: | 2019-03-18 22:14:01 |
| Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.21.1903182311130.23282@lancre |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I have rebased it now.
Thanks. Will look at it.
>> If the all of aboves are involved, the line would look as the
>> follows.
>>
>> [======================= ] ( 63% of 12.53 GB, 179 MB/s, ETC 26s)
>>
>> # Note that this is just an opinion.
>>
>> (pg_checksum runs fast at the beginning so ETC behaves somewhat
>> strange in the meanwhile.)
>
> I haven't changed that for now as it seems to be a bit more involved.
> I'd like to hear other opinions on whether that is worthwhile?
I think that the bar is overkill, but ETC is easy and nice.
>>> + /* we handle SIGUSR1 only, and toggle the value of show_progress */
>>> + if (signum == SIGUSR1)
>>> + show_progress = !show_progress;
>>
>> SIGUSR1 *toggles* progress.
>
> Not sure what you mean here,
Probably it is meant to simplify the comment?
--
Fabien.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2019-03-18 23:24:40 | Re: What to name the current heap after pluggable storage / what to rename? |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-03-18 22:08:52 | Re: [HACKERS] Custom compression methods |