From: | Josef Šimánek <josef(dot)simanek(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Simple progress reporting for COPY command |
Date: | 2021-01-08 04:15:16 |
Message-ID: | CAFp7Qwo7smm0rH6JpCK3-qjKqS5yQN1X-Lg15PWFr8Rsonxdvw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
pá 8. 1. 2021 v 5:03 odesílatel Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> napsal:
>
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 8:42 AM Josef Šimánek <josef(dot)simanek(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > pá 8. 1. 2021 v 3:55 odesílatel Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> napsal:
> > >
> > >
> > > Can't we display the entire COPY command? I checked that
> > > pg_stat_statements display the query so there shouldn't be a problem
> > > to display the entire command.
> >
> > In previous discussions there was mentioned it doesn't make sense
> > since you can join with pg_stat_statements on the pid column if
> > needed. What would be the reason to duplicate that info?
> >
>
> But pg_stat_staments won't be present by default. Also, the same
> argument could be applied for the command to be present in
> stat_progress views. It occurred to me only when I was trying to
> compare what we display in all the progress views. I think there is
> some merit in being consistent.
Sorry, I mean pg_stat_activity (not pg_stat_statements). That is
included by default (at least in my installations).
> --
> With Regards,
> Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2021-01-08 04:19:18 | Re: Add Information during standby recovery conflicts |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-01-08 04:05:46 | Re: [PATCH] Simple progress reporting for COPY command |