Re: pg_stat_progress_basebackup - progress reporting forpg_basebackup, in the server side
От | Fujii Masao |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_stat_progress_basebackup - progress reporting forpg_basebackup, in the server side |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5b3419c6-31bf-1966-efe3-eaa7ec652754@oss.nttdata.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_stat_progress_basebackup - progress reporting forpg_basebackup, in the server side (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_stat_progress_basebackup - progress reporting forpg_basebackup, in the server side
(Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020/02/03 16:28, Amit Langote wrote: > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 1:17 PM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote: >> On 2020/02/02 14:59, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >>> On Fri, 31 Jan 2020 at 02:29, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote: >>>> On 2020/01/30 12:58, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: >>>>> + WHEN 3 THEN 'stopping backup'::text >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure, but the "stop" seems suggesting the backup is terminated >>>>> before completion. If it is following the name of the function >>>>> pg_stop_backup, I think the name is suggesting to stop "the state for >>>>> performing backup", not a backup. >>>>> >>>>> In the first place, the progress is about "backup" so it seems strange >>>>> that we have another phase after the "stopping backup" phase. It >>>>> might be better that it is "finishing file transfer" or such. >>>>> >>>>> "initializing" >>>>> -> "starting file transfer" >>>>> -> "transferring files" >>>>> -> "finishing file transfer" >>>>> -> "transaferring WAL" >>>> >>>> Better name is always welcome! If "stopping back" is confusing, >>>> what about "performing pg_stop_backup"? So >>>> >>>> initializing >>>> performing pg_start_backup >>>> streaming database files >>>> performing pg_stop_backup >>>> transfering WAL files >>> >>> Another idea I came up with is to show steps that take time instead of >>> pg_start_backup/pg_stop_backup, for better understanding the >>> situation. That is, "performing checkpoint" and "performing WAL >>> archive" etc, which engage the most of the time of these functions. >> >> Yeah, that's an idea. ISTM that "waiting for WAL archiving" sounds >> better than "performing WAL archive". Thought? >> I've not applied this change in the patch yet, but if there is no >> other idea, I'd like to adopt this. > > If we are trying to "pg_stop_backup" in phase name, maybe we should > avoid "pg_start_backup"? Then maybe: > > initializing > starting backup / waiting for [ backup start ] checkpoint to finish > transferring database files > finishing backup / waiting for WAL archiving to finish > transferring WAL files So we now have the following ideas about the phase names for pg_basebackup. 1. initializing 2. 2-1. starting backup 2-2. starting file transfer 2-3. performing pg_start_backup 2-4. performing checkpoint 2-5. waiting for [ backup start ] checkpoint to finish 3. 3-1. streaming backup 3-2. transferring database files 3-3. streaming database files 3-4. transferring files 4. 4-1. stopping backup 4-2. finishing file transfer 4-3. performing pg_stop_backup 4-4. finishing backup 4-5. waiting for WAL archiving to finish 4-6. performing WAL archive 5. 1. transferring wal 2. transferring WAL files What conbination of these do you prefer? > Some comments on documentation changes in v2 patch: > > + Amount of data already streamed. Ok, fixed. > "already" may be redundant. For example, in pg_start_progress_vacuum, > heap_blks_scanned is described as "...blocks scanned", not "...blocks > already scanned". > > + <entry><structfield>tablespace_total</structfield></entry> > + <entry><structfield>tablespace_streamed</structfield></entry> > > Better to use plural tablespaces_total and tablespaces_streamed for consistency? Fixed. > + The WAL sender process is currently performing > + <function>pg_start_backup</function> and setting up for > + making a base backup. > > How about "taking" instead of "making" in the above sentence? Fixed. Attached is the updated version of the patch. > > - <varlistentry> > + <varlistentry id="protocol-replication-base-backup" xreflabel="BASE_BACKUP"> > > I don't see any new text in the documentation patch that uses above > xref, so no need to define it? The following description that I added uses this. certain commands during command execution. Currently, the only commands which support progress reporting are <command>ANALYZE</command>, <command>CLUSTER</command>, - <command>CREATE INDEX</command>, and <command>VACUUM</command>. + <command>CREATE INDEX</command>, <command>VACUUM</command>, + and <xref linkend="protocol-replication-base-backup"/> (i.e., replication + command that <xref linkend="app-pgbasebackup"/> issues to take + a base backup). Regards, -- Fujii Masao NTT DATA CORPORATION Advanced Platform Technology Group Research and Development Headquarters
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:
Предыдущее
От: Andres FreundДата:
Сообщение: Re: PATCH: standby crashed when replay block which truncated instandby but failed to truncate in master node