Re: [RFC] CLUSTER VERBOSE
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [RFC] CLUSTER VERBOSE |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 45FA5B09.9080708@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | [RFC] CLUSTER VERBOSE (Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj@pointblue.com.pl>) |
Ответы |
Re: [RFC] CLUSTER VERBOSE
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Grzegorz Jaskiewicz wrote: > Because CLUSTER is divided into two major operations, (data reordering, > index rebuild) - I see it this way: > > CLUSTER on I: <index name> T: <table name>, data reordering > CLUSTER on I: <index name> T: <table name>, index rebuild Something like that would be nice to see how long each step takes, like vacuum verbose. > and than: > CLUSTER 10% > CLUSTER 12% , etc We don't have progress indicators for any other commands, and I don't see why we should add one for cluster in particular. Sure, progress indicators are nice, but we should rather try to add some kind of a general progress indicator support that would support SELECTs for example. I know it's much harder, but also much more useful. > I am looking for opinions, on what information should be presented. What would be useful is some kind of a metric of how (de)clustered the table was before CLUSTER, and the same # of dead vs. live row counts that vacuum verbose prints. We don't really have a good metric for clusteredness, as have been discussed before, so if you can come up with a good one that would be useful in the planner as well, that would be great. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: