| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| 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: | 2023-04-07 19:01:17 |
| Message-ID: | 20230407190117.aipm6zty3w37mtxw@awork3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2023-04-06 12:28:04 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> As some say, the introduction of a new message type in pqmq.c would be
> basically a one-way door, because we'd have to maintain it in a stable
> branch.
Why would it mean that? Parallel workers are updated together with the leader,
so there's no compatibility issue?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Imseih (AWS), Sami | 2023-04-07 19:27:17 | Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-04-07 18:55:28 | Re: daitch_mokotoff module |