Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fabien COELHO
Subject Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums
Date
Msg-id alpine.DEB.2.21.1812251208050.32444@lancre
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums  (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>)
Responses Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums  (Michael Banck <michael.banck@credativ.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
> Given the speed of verifying checksums and its storage-oriented status, I 
> also still think that a (possibly fractional) MB (1,000,000 bytes), or even 
> GB, is the right unit to use for reporting this progress. On my laptop (SSD), 
> verifying runs at least at 1.26 GB/s (on one small test), there is no point 
> in displaying kilobytes progress.

Obviously the file is cached by the system at such speed, but still most 
disks should provides dozens of MB per second of read bandwidth. If GB is 
used, it should use fractional display (eg 1.25 GB) though.

-- 
Fabien.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fabien COELHO
Date:
Subject: Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums
Next
From: Fabien COELHO
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump multi VALUES INSERT