On 2021/04/02 18:19, shinya11.k...@nttdata.com wrote:
Thanks for your review!
I updated the patch, and attached it.
Thanks for updating the patch! Pushed.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 06:03:21PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On 2021/04/02 16:47, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I have not looked
>> in details and have not looked at the patch yet, though. Fujii-san,
>> are you planning to take care of that?
>
> Yes, I will. Thanks for the consideration!
OK, than
>-Original Message-
>From: Fujii Masao
>Sent: Friday, April 2, 2021 6:03 PM
>To: Michael Paquier ; shinya11.k...@nttdata.com
>Cc: pgsql-hack...@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: Fix pg_checksums progress report
>
>
>
>On 2021/04/02 16:47, Michael Paquier wrote:
&g
On 2021/04/02 16:47, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 07:30:32AM +, shinya11.k...@nttdata.com wrote:
I added a comment to the patch, and attached the new patch.
Thanks for updating the patch!
+ /*
+* The current_size is calculated before chec
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 07:30:32AM +, shinya11.k...@nttdata.com wrote:
> I added a comment to the patch, and attached the new patch.
Hmm. This looks to come from 280e5f14 that introduced the progress
reports so this would need a backpatch down to 12. I have not looked
in details and have not
>-Original Message-
>From: Fujii Masao
>Sent: Friday, April 2, 2021 2:39 PM
>To: shinya11.k...@nttdata.com; pgsql-hack...@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: Fix pg_checksums progress report
>
>
>
>On 2021/04/02 14:23, shinya11.k...@nttdata.com wrote:
>> Hi,
On 2021/04/02 14:23, shinya11.k...@nttdata.com wrote:
Hi,
I found a problem with the pg_checksums.c.
The total_size is calculated by scanning the directory.
The current_size is calculated by scanning the files, but the current_size does
not include the size of NewPages.
This may cause pg_c