On 2019-04-05 17:01, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Users are going to wonder why the other phases don't appear to complete
> for a long time :-) Keep in mind that the "waiting" phases are very
> confusing to users. I suggest we just define additional phase numbers
> for those phases, then switch the "false" argument to
> WaitForLockersMultiple to "true", and it should work :-) Doc-wise, list
> all the phases in the same docbook table, indicate that REINDEX is also
> covered, and document in an easier-to-follow fashion which phases each
> command goes through.
Done in the attached patch.
I've reworded the phases a bit. There was a bit of a mixup of waiting
for snapshots and waiting for lockers. Perhaps not so important from a
user's perspective, but at least now it's more consistent with the
source code comments.
> Yeah, I think that's simple enough -- the CLUSTER one already does that,
> I think.
Added that.
> Another thing for REINDEX TABLE is that we should add a count
> of indexes to process, and how many are done.
Reasonable, but maybe a bit too much for the last moment.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
