From: | Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, pokurev(at)pm(dot)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, bannos(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp |
Subject: | Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker. |
Date: | 2016-03-16 10:44:13 |
Message-ID: | CAH2L28singMJ2-3WRkuvH1Xmc+E=2SPmEpJ6_JF0Xwr1BXqFGg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>Sorta. Committed after renaming what you called heap blocks vacuumed
>back to heap blocks scanned, adding heap blocks vacuumed, removing the
>overall progress meter which I don't believe will be anything close to
>accurate, fixing some stylistic stuff, arranging to update multiple
>counters automatically where it could otherwise produce confusion,
>moving the new view near similar ones in the file, reformatting it to
>follow the style of the rest of the file, exposing the counter
>#defines via a header file in case extensions want to use them, and
>overhauling and substantially expanding the documentation
We have following lines,
/* report that everything is scanned and vacuumed */
pgstat_progress_update_param(PROGRESS_VACUUM_HEAP_BLKS_SCANNED,
blkno);
pgstat_progress_update_param(PROGRESS_VACUUM_HEAP_BLKS_VACUUMED,
blkno);
which appear before final vacuum cycle happens for any remaining dead
tuples which may span few pages if I am not mistaken.
IMO, reporting final count of heap_blks_scanned is correct here, but
reporting final heap_blks_vacuumed can happen after the final VACUUM cycle
for more accuracy.
Thank you,
Rahila Syed
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Shulgin, Oleksandr | 2016-03-16 10:49:07 | Re: pg_hba_lookup function to get all matching pg_hba.conf entries |
Previous Message | Anastasia Lubennikova | 2016-03-16 10:40:05 | Re: [PATCH] Supporting +-Infinity values by to_timestamp(float8) |