On 2020-Mar-19, Amit Langote wrote:
> Magnus' idea of checking the values in pg_stat_get_progress_info() to
> determine whether to return NULL seems fine to me. We will need to
> update the documentation of st_progress_param, because it currently
> says:
>
> * ...but the meaning of each element in the
> * st_progress_param array is command-specific.
> */
> ProgressCommandType st_progress_command;
> Oid st_progress_command_target;
> int64 st_progress_param[PGSTAT_NUM_PROGRESS_PARAM];
> } PgBackendStatus;
>
> If we are to define -1 in st_progress_param[] as NULL to the users,
> that must be mentioned here.
Hmm, why -1? It seems like a value that we might want to use for other
purposes in other params. Maybe INT64_MIN is a better choice?
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
