Re: [HACKERS] small pg_basebackup display bug
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander writes: >> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Erik Rijkers wrote: >>> That would make such a truncation less frequent, and after all a truncated >>> display is not >>> particular useful. > >> Agreed - it's useful during testing, but not in a typical production >> use. It might actually be more useful if it's truncated in in the >> other end (keeping the last 30 instead of the first 30 chars) > > +1 for truncating from the left. I think pg_upgrade already does that > in its progress messages. Fixed. I also fixed the output of the size parameter to be a fixed length, so the whole row doesn't shift left and right depending on how far long the process is. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] small pg_basebackup display bug
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 01:20:53PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander writes: > > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Erik Rijkers wrote: > >> That would make such a truncation less frequent, and after all a truncated > >> display is not > >> particular useful. > > > Agreed - it's useful during testing, but not in a typical production > > use. It might actually be more useful if it's truncated in in the > > other end (keeping the last 30 instead of the first 30 chars) > > +1 for truncating from the left. I think pg_upgrade already does that > in its progress messages. Yes, it does in the current git tree. -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] small pg_basebackup display bug
Magnus Hagander writes: > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Erik Rijkers wrote: >> That would make such a truncation less frequent, and after all a truncated >> display is not >> particular useful. > Agreed - it's useful during testing, but not in a typical production > use. It might actually be more useful if it's truncated in in the > other end (keeping the last 30 instead of the first 30 chars) +1 for truncating from the left. I think pg_upgrade already does that in its progress messages. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] small pg_basebackup display bug
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Erik Rijkers wrote: > On Sat, December 15, 2012 14:10, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Erik Rijkers wrote: >>> from 9.3devel (this morning): >> >> >>> The truncated name in parentheses only shows up during the filling of the >>> new PGDATA; when 100% >>> is >>> reached that part of the displayed name is deleted. That's another bug in >>> itself, I think: >>> shouldn't the end-state of that line also display the parenthesized name? >> >> Those are both intentional. It may be argued that the intention shoud >> be changed :), but it's not a bug in itself - it's acting like >> intended. >> > > Fair enough. How about just changing the possible length to enable display > somewhat longer names > like I used? It truncates to 30 characters; perhaps something like 100 would > be more reasonable? The general idea with the selection was that it shouldn't truncate on a "normal terminal". 30 might be a bit on the aggressive side, but 100 would be guaranteed to almost always do it (since there is also other text on the line than just the filename). I'm not sure if we can figure out the size of the screen in a platform independent way without going through a lot of extra work though - but maybe we can? > That would make such a truncation less frequent, and after all a truncated > display is not > particular useful. Agreed - it's useful during testing, but not in a typical production use. It might actually be more useful if it's truncated in in the other end (keeping the last 30 instead of the first 30 chars) -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] small pg_basebackup display bug
On Sat, December 15, 2012 14:10, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Erik Rijkers wrote: >> from 9.3devel (this morning): > > >> The truncated name in parentheses only shows up during the filling of the >> new PGDATA; when 100% >> is >> reached that part of the displayed name is deleted. That's another bug in >> itself, I think: >> shouldn't the end-state of that line also display the parenthesized name? > > Those are both intentional. It may be argued that the intention shoud > be changed :), but it's not a bug in itself - it's acting like > intended. > Fair enough. How about just changing the possible length to enable display somewhat longer names like I used? It truncates to 30 characters; perhaps something like 100 would be more reasonable? That would make such a truncation less frequent, and after all a truncated display is not particular useful. Thanks, Erik Rijkers -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] small pg_basebackup display bug
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Erik Rijkers wrote: > from 9.3devel (this morning): Is this different from 9.2 and earlier? > There is a small bug in pg_basebackup: it displays a truncated part of what > seems to be the new > $PGDATA (the source code has 'filename' there, but I don't see what's > supposed to be in there). It is the full name of the file. If the path is too long it gets truncated before it gets to the actual filename, of course, so it looks to be the directory. > The truncated name in parentheses only shows up during the filling of the new > PGDATA; when 100% is > reached that part of the displayed name is deleted. That's another bug in > itself, I think: > shouldn't the end-state of that line also display the parenthesized name? Those are both intentional. It may be argued that the intention shoud be changed :), but it's not a bug in itself - it's acting like intended. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
