Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Rahila Syed
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.
Date
Msg-id CAH2L28uSReA97rNfQ2Wb5VKPwaR_2biEiDbBinQv3Z2_q+3OYw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
>I suspect you need to create a new CF entry for this patch in CF 2016-01.

Unless I am missing something, there seems to be no entry for this patch into CF 2016-01 page: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/8/.
Regrettably, we have exceeded the deadline to add the patch into this commitfest. Is there still some way to add it to the commitfest 2016-01? As this feature has received lot of feedback in previous commitfest , adding it to this commitfest will surely help in progressing it in order to make it ready for PostgreSQL 9.6.

Thank you,
Rahila Syed
 

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:01 AM, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Hi Vinayak,

On 2015/12/25 21:46, Vinayak Pokale wrote:
> Hi,
> Please find attached patch addressing following comments.
>
>> The relation OID should be reported and not its name. In case of a
>> relation rename that would not be cool for tracking, and most users
>> are surely going to join with other system tables using it.
> The relation OID is reported instead of relation name.
> The following interface function is called at the beginning to report the
> relation OID once.
> void pgstat_report_command_target(Oid relid)
>
>> Regarding pg_stat_get_vacuum_progress(): I think a backend can simply be
>> skipped if (!has_privs_of_role(GetUserId(), beentry->st_userid)) (cannot
>> put that in plain English, :))
> Updated in the attached patch.
>
> In the previous patch, ACTIVITY_IS_VACUUM is set unnecessarily for
> VACOPT_FULL and they are not covered by lazy_scan_heap().
> I have updated it in attached patch and also renamed ACTIVITY_IS_VACUUM to
> COMMAND_LAZY_VACUUM.
>
> Added documentation for view.
> Some more comments need to be addressed.

I suspect you need to create a new CF entry for this patch in CF 2016-01.

Thanks,
Amit



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Vladimir Borodin
Date:
Subject: Re: Improving replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM records
Next
From: Vitaly Burovoy
Date:
Subject: New feature "... ALTER CONSTRAINT ... VERIFY USING INDEX"