Hi,
On 2022-02-16 17:09:34 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 4:42 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 9, 2022 at 10:39:58PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > On 2022-01-10 01:14:32 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > I think I'd vote for just nuking that output altogether.
> > > > It seems of very dubious value.
> > >
> > > It seems worthwhile in some form - on large cluster in copy mode, the "Copying
> > > user relation files" step can take *quite* a while, and even link/clone mode
> > > aren't fast. But perhaps what'd be really needed is something counting up
> > > actual progress in percentage of files and/or space...
> > >
> > > I think just coupling it to verbose mode makes the most sense, for now?
> >
> > All of this logging is from the stage where I was excited pg_upgrade
> > worked, and I wanted to give clear output if it failed in some way ---
> > printing the file names seems like an easy solution. I agree at this
> > point that logging should be reduced, and if they want more logging, the
> > verbose option is the right way to get it.
>
> +1
I got a bit stuck on how to best resolve this. I felt bad about removing all
interactive progress, because a pg_upgrade can take a while after all. But
it's also not easy to come up with some good, without a substantially bigger
effort than I want to invest.
After all, I just want to be able to read check-world output. Nearly half of
which is pg_upgrade test output right now.
The attached is my attempt at coming up with something halfway sane without
rewriting pg_upgrade logging entirely. I think it mostly ends up with at least
as sane output as the current code. I needed to add a separate
prep_status_progress() function to make that work.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
