On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 8:29 PM, Oskari Saarenmaa <o...@ohmu.fi> wrote:
> 31.01.2014 10:59, Sawada Masahiko kirjoitti:
> I think the idea in the new progress_report() call (with force == true) is
> to make sure that there is at least one progress_report call that actually
> writes the progress report.  Otherwise the final report may go missing if it
> gets suppressed by the time-based check.  The force argument as used in the
> new call skips that check.

I understood.

I have two concerns as follows.
- I think that there is possible that progress_report() is called
frequently ( less than 1 second).
  That is, progress_report() is called with force == true after
progress_report was called with force == false and execute this
- progress_report() is called even if -P option is disabled. I'm
concerned about that is cause of performance degradation.


Sawada Masahiko

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to