On 2016/03/11 13:16, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 9:04 PM, Amit Langote > <langote_amit...@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?
Right, 0003 should hopefully become that mechanism. Thanks, Amit -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers