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.2.21.1903281002300.20516@lancre
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums  (Michael Banck <michael.banck@credativ.de>)
Responses Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums
List pgsql-hackers
>> Otherwise a very minor comment: I'd invert !force and the computations in
>> the return condition to avoid the computations when not needed.
>
> The force is only ever true right at the end of the program so it would
> not save anything really and detract from the main gist of that
> statement, so I left it as-is.

Ok.

I marked it as ready, but I'd advise that you split it in (1) progress and 
(2) signal toggling so that the first part is more likely to make it 
before 12 freeze.

-- 
Fabien.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: idle-in-transaction timeout error does not give a hint
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: ToDo: show size of partitioned table