On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 8:29 PM, Oskari Saarenmaa <o...@ohmu.fi> wrote: > 31.01.2014 10:59, Sawada Masahiko kirjoitti: > > I think the idea in the new progress_report() call (with force == true) is > to make sure that there is at least one progress_report call that actually > writes the progress report. Otherwise the final report may go missing if it > gets suppressed by the time-based check. The force argument as used in the > new call skips that check. >
I understood. I have two concerns as follows. - I think that there is possible that progress_report() is called frequently ( less than 1 second). That is, progress_report() is called with force == true after progress_report was called with force == false and execute this function. - progress_report() is called even if -P option is disabled. I'm concerned about that is cause of performance degradation. Regards, ------- Sawada Masahiko -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
