| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This allows determining which command is running, similar to
pg_stat_progress_cluster.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/f0e56b3b-74b7-6cbc-e207-a5ed6bee18dc%402ndquadrant.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This uses the same infrastructure that the CREATE INDEX progress
reporting uses. Add a column to pg_stat_progress_create_index to
report the OID of the index being worked on. This was not necessary
for CREATE INDEX, but it's useful for REINDEX.
Also edit the phase descriptions a bit to be more consistent with the
source code comments.
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ef6a6757-c36a-9e81-123f-13b19e36b7d7%402ndquadrant.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This uses the progress reporting infrastructure added by c16dc1aca5e0,
adding support for CREATE INDEX and CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY.
There are two pieces to this: one is index-AM-agnostic, and the other is
AM-specific. The latter is fairly elaborate for btrees, including
reportage for parallel index builds and the separate phases that btree
index creation uses; other index AMs, which are much simpler in their
building procedures, have simplistic reporting only, but that seems
sufficient, at least for non-concurrent builds.
The index-AM-agnostic part is fairly complete, providing insight into
the CONCURRENTLY wait phases as well as block-based progress during the
index validation table scan. (The index validation index scan requires
patching each AM, which has not been included here.)
Reviewers: Rahila Syed, Pavan Deolasee, Tatsuro Yamada
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20181220220022.mg63bhk26zdpvmcj@alvherre.pgsql
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This uses the same progress reporting infrastructure added in commit
c16dc1aca5e01e6acaadfcf38f5fc964a381dc62 and extends it to these
additional cases. We lack the ability to track the internal progress
of sorts and index builds so the information reported is
coarse-grained for some parts of the operation, but it still seems
like a significant improvement over having nothing at all.
Tatsuro Yamada, reviewed by Thomas Munro, Masahiko Sawada, Michael
Paquier, Jeff Janes, Alvaro Herrera, Rafia Sabih, and by me. A fair
amount of polishing also by me.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/59A77072.3090401@lab.ntt.co.jp
|
| |
|
|
| |
Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.4
|
| |
|
|
| |
Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.3
|
| | |
|
|
|
There's a lot more that could be done here yet - in particular, this
reports only very coarse-grained information about the index vacuuming
phase - but even as it stands, the new pg_stat_progress_vacuum can
tell you quite a bit about what a long-running vacuum is actually
doing.
Amit Langote and Robert Haas, based on earlier work by Vinayak Pokale
and Rahila Syed.
|
