Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 9:04 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> So, from what I understand here, we should not put total count of index
> pages into st_progress_param; rather, have the client (reading
> pg_stat_progress_vacuum) derive it using pg_indexes_size() (?), as and
> when necessary.  However, only server is able to tell the current position
> within an index vacuuming round (or how many pages into a given index
> vacuuming round), so report that using some not-yet-existent mechanism.

Isn't that mechanism what you are trying to create in 0003?  But
otherwise, yes, you've accurate summarized what I think we should do.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company