| From: | "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum |
| Date: | 2022-01-10 18:30:09 |
| Message-ID: | 6D2C60C2-C09E-4117-A6B8-DCA7A0F5B182@amazon.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/6/22, 6:14 PM, "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
> I am hesitant to make column name changes for obvious reasons, as it breaks existing tooling. However, I think there is a really good case to change "index_vacuum_count" as the name is confusing. "index_vacuum_cycles_completed" is the name I suggest if we agree to rename.
>
> For the new column, "num_indexes_to_vacuum" is good with me.
Yeah, I think we can skip renaming index_vacuum_count for now. In any
case, it would probably be good to discuss that in a separate thread.
Nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | rajesh singarapu | 2022-01-10 18:51:51 | Re: Converting WAL to SQL |
| Previous Message | Andrey Lepikhov | 2022-01-10 17:55:36 | Re: Multiple Query IDs for a rewritten parse tree |