Re: progress report for ANALYZE

From: Tatsuro Yamada <tatsuro(dot)yamada(dot)tf(at)nttcom(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: progress report for ANALYZE
Date: 2020-01-27 10:16:25
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 2020/01/24 23:44, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 6:47 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 2020-Jan-22, Tatsuro Yamada wrote:
>>> P.S.
>>> Next up is progress reporting for query execution?!
>> Actually, I think it's ALTER TABLE.
> +1. Existing infrastructure might be enough to cover ALTER TABLE's
> needs, whereas we will very likely need to build entirely different
> infrastructure for tracking the progress for SQL query execution.

Yeah, I agree.
I will create a little POC patch after reading tablecmds.c and alter.c to
investigate how to report progress. :)

Tatsuro Yamada

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2020-01-27 10:28:31 Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?
Previous Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2020-01-27 09:38:13 Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables