From: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Josef Šimánek <josef(dot)simanek(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Initial progress reporting for COPY command |
Date: | 2020-06-25 01:05:22 |
Message-ID: | CALDaNm32E8AYwB0aau2zd0MnjxZC2HM9in_vH_SFSovv8CuJng@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 4:45 PM Tomas Vondra
<tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Anyway if you would like to make this view more user-friendly, I can add that. Just ping me.
> >
> >I felt we could add pg_size_pretty to make the view more user friendly.
> >
>
> Please no. That'd make processing of the data (say, computing progress
> as processed/total) impossible. It's easy to add pg_size_pretty if you
> want it, it's impossible to undo it. I don't see a single pg_size_pretty
> call in system_views.sql.
>
I thought of including pg_size_pretty as we there was no total_bytes
to compare with, but I'm ok without it too as there is an option for
user to always include it in the client side like "SELECT
pg_size_pretty(file_bytes_processed) from pg_stat_progress_copy;" if
required.
Regards,
Vignesh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-06-25 01:50:26 | Re: should libpq also require TLSv1.2 by default? |
Previous Message | Melanie Plageman | 2020-06-25 00:26:07 | Re: hashagg slowdown due to spill changes |