summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/include/utils/backend_progress.h
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2024-01-03Update copyright for 2024Bruce Momjian
Reported-by: Michael Paquier Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/ZZKTDPxBBMt3C0J9@paquier.xyz Backpatch-through: 12
2023-10-26Add trailing commas to enum definitionsPeter Eisentraut
Since C99, there can be a trailing comma after the last value in an enum definition. A lot of new code has been introducing this style on the fly. Some new patches are now taking an inconsistent approach to this. Some add the last comma on the fly if they add a new last value, some are trying to preserve the existing style in each place, some are even dropping the last comma if there was one. We could nudge this all in a consistent direction if we just add the trailing commas everywhere once. I omitted a few places where there was a fixed "last" value that will always stay last. I also skipped the header files of libpq and ecpg, in case people want to use those with older compilers. There were also a small number of cases where the enum type wasn't used anywhere (but the enum values were), which ended up confusing pgindent a bit, so I left those alone. Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/386f8c45-c8ac-4681-8add-e3b0852c1620%40eisentraut.org
2023-07-11Add new parallel message type to progress reporting.Masahiko Sawada
This commit adds a new type of parallel message 'P' to allow a parallel worker to poke at a leader to update the progress. Currently it supports only incremental progress reporting but it's possible to allow for supporting of other backend progress APIs in the future. There are no users of this new message type as of this commit. That will follow in future commits. Idea from Andres Freund. Author: Sami Imseih Reviewed by: Michael Paquier, Masahiko Sawada Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/5478DFCD-2333-401A-B2F0-0D186AB09228@amazon.com
2023-03-25Fix CREATE INDEX progress reporting for multi-level partitioning.Tom Lane
The "partitions_total" and "partitions_done" fields were updated as though the current level of partitioning was the only one. In multi-level cases, not only could partitions_total change over the course of the command, but partitions_done could go backwards or exceed the currently-reported partitions_total. Fix by setting partitions_total to the total number of direct and indirect children once at command start, and then just incrementing partitions_done at appropriate points. Invent a new progress monitoring function "pgstat_progress_incr_param" to simplify doing the latter. We can avoid adding cost for the former when doing CREATE INDEX, because ProcessUtility already enumerates the children and it's pretty easy to pass the count down to DefineIndex. In principle the same could be done in ALTER TABLE, but that's structurally difficult; for now, just eat the cost of an extra find_all_inheritors scan in that case. Ilya Gladyshev and Justin Pryzby Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/a15f904a70924ffa4ca25c3c744cff31e0e6e143.camel@gmail.com
2023-01-02Update copyright for 2023Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: 11
2022-01-07Update copyright for 2022Bruce Momjian
Backpatch-through: 10
2021-05-12Initial pgindent and pgperltidy run for v14.Tom Lane
Also "make reformat-dat-files". The only change worthy of note is that pgindent messed up the formatting of launcher.c's struct LogicalRepWorkerId, which led me to notice that that struct wasn't used at all anymore, so I just took it out.
2021-04-03Split backend status and progress related functionality out of pgstat.c.Andres Freund
Backend status (supporting pg_stat_activity) and command progress (supporting pg_stat_progress*) related code is largely independent from the rest of pgstat.[ch] (supporting views like pg_stat_all_tables that accumulate data over time). See also a333476b925. This commit doesn't rename the function names to make the distinction from the rest of pgstat_ clearer - that'd be more invasive and not clearly beneficial. If we were to decide to do such a rename at some point, it's better done separately from moving the code as well. Robert's review was of an earlier version. Reviewed-By: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20210316195440.twxmlov24rr2nxrg@alap3.anarazel.de