On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 5:33 AM, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> wrote: > I think the idea of a general progress view is very valuable and there > are a ton of operations it could be used for: full table scans, index > rebuilds, vacuum, copy, etc. > > However, I feel that this proposal is not flexible enough and comes too > late in the release cycle to allow development into something that could > be committed.
Well, each command really has its own requirements in terms of data to store, so we either finish with a bunch of small tables that anyone could query and join as they wish or a somewhat unique table that is bloated with all the information, with a set of views on top of it to query all the information. For extensibility's sake of each command (for example imagine that REINDEX could be extended with a CONCURRENTLY option and multiple phases), I would think that having a table per command type would not be that bad. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
