Re: Progress report of CREATE INDEX for nested partitioned tables

On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 08:30:02AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> We have the common problem of too many patches.
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/a15f904a70924ffa4ca25c3c744cff31e0e6e143.camel%40gmail.com
> This changes the progress reporting to show indirect children as
> "total", and adds a global variable to track recursion into
> DefineIndex(), allowing it to be incremented without the value being
> lost to the caller.
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20221211063334.GB27893%40telsasoft.com
> This also counts indirect children, but only increments the progress
> reporting in the parent. This has the disadvantage that when
> intermediate partitions are in use, the done_partitions counter will
> "jump" from (say) 20 to 30 without ever hitting 21-29.
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20221213044331.GJ27893%40telsasoft.com
> This has two alternate patches:
> - One patch changes to only update progress reporting of *direct*
> children. This is minimal, but discourages any future plan to track
> progress involving intermediate partitions with finer granularity.
> - A alternative patch adds IndexStmt.nparts_done, and allows reporting
> fine-grained progress involving intermediate partitions.
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/039564d234fc3d014c555a7ee98be69a9e724836(dot)camel(at)gmail(dot)com
> This also reports progress of intermediate children. The first patch
> does it by adding an argument to DefineIndex() (which isn't okay to
> backpatch). And an alternate patch does it by adding to IndexStmt.
>
> @committers: Is it okay to add nparts_done to IndexStmt ?

Any hint about this ?

This should be resolved before the "CIC on partitioned tables" patch,
which I think is otherwise done.