| From: | Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums |
| Date: | 2019-02-18 15:59:25 |
| Message-ID: | 8e2dc0fcbe01567e85ea190cd659bf61b34c74dc.camel@oopsware.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Am Montag, den 18.02.2019, 16:52 +0100 schrieb Michael Banck:
> > Surely we know at that point whether this first scan is needed, and
> we
> > can skip it if not?
>
> Yeah - new patch attached.
Maybe i'm wrong, but my thought is that this breaks the SIGUSR1
business, since there seems no code path which calculates total_size in
this case?
Bernd
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oleksii Kliukin | 2019-02-18 16:05:13 | Prepared transaction releasing locks before deregistering its GID |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2019-02-18 15:56:19 | boolean and bool in documentation |