On 2020-Mar-19, Amit Langote wrote: > Magnus' idea of checking the values in pg_stat_get_progress_info() to > determine whether to return NULL seems fine to me. We will need to > update the documentation of st_progress_param, because it currently > says: > > * ...but the meaning of each element in the > * st_progress_param array is command-specific. > */ > ProgressCommandType st_progress_command; > Oid st_progress_command_target; > int64 st_progress_param[PGSTAT_NUM_PROGRESS_PARAM]; > } PgBackendStatus; > > If we are to define -1 in st_progress_param[] as NULL to the users, > that must be mentioned here.
Hmm, why -1? It seems like a value that we might want to use for other purposes in other params. Maybe INT64_MIN is a better choice? -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
