On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 1:17 PM Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com> wrote: > On 2020/02/02 14:59, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > On Fri, 31 Jan 2020 at 02:29, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com> > > wrote: > >> On 2020/01/30 12:58, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > >>> + WHEN 3 THEN 'stopping backup'::text > >>> > >>> I'm not sure, but the "stop" seems suggesting the backup is terminated > >>> before completion. If it is following the name of the function > >>> pg_stop_backup, I think the name is suggesting to stop "the state for > >>> performing backup", not a backup. > >>> > >>> In the first place, the progress is about "backup" so it seems strange > >>> that we have another phase after the "stopping backup" phase. It > >>> might be better that it is "finishing file transfer" or such. > >>> > >>> "initializing" > >>> -> "starting file transfer" > >>> -> "transferring files" > >>> -> "finishing file transfer" > >>> -> "transaferring WAL" > >> > >> Better name is always welcome! If "stopping back" is confusing, > >> what about "performing pg_stop_backup"? So > >> > >> initializing > >> performing pg_start_backup > >> streaming database files > >> performing pg_stop_backup > >> transfering WAL files > > > > Another idea I came up with is to show steps that take time instead of > > pg_start_backup/pg_stop_backup, for better understanding the > > situation. That is, "performing checkpoint" and "performing WAL > > archive" etc, which engage the most of the time of these functions. > > Yeah, that's an idea. ISTM that "waiting for WAL archiving" sounds > better than "performing WAL archive". Thought? > I've not applied this change in the patch yet, but if there is no > other idea, I'd like to adopt this.
If we are trying to "pg_stop_backup" in phase name, maybe we should avoid "pg_start_backup"? Then maybe: initializing starting backup / waiting for [ backup start ] checkpoint to finish transferring database files finishing backup / waiting for WAL archiving to finish transferring WAL files ? Some comments on documentation changes in v2 patch: + Amount of data already streamed. "already" may be redundant. For example, in pg_start_progress_vacuum, heap_blks_scanned is described as "...blocks scanned", not "...blocks already scanned". + <entry><structfield>tablespace_total</structfield></entry> + <entry><structfield>tablespace_streamed</structfield></entry> Better to use plural tablespaces_total and tablespaces_streamed for consistency? + The WAL sender process is currently performing + <function>pg_start_backup</function> and setting up for + making a base backup. How about "taking" instead of "making" in the above sentence? - <varlistentry> + <varlistentry id="protocol-replication-base-backup" xreflabel="BASE_BACKUP"> I don't see any new text in the documentation patch that uses above xref, so no need to define it? Thanks, Amit
