Re: log_autovacuum in Postgres 14 -- ordering issue
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: log_autovacuum in Postgres 14 -- ordering issue |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-WznW0FNxSVQMSRazAMYNfZ6DR_gr5WE78hc6E1CBkkJpzw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: log_autovacuum in Postgres 14 -- ordering issue (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: log_autovacuum in Postgres 14 -- ordering issue
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 2:07 PM Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote: > I generally like the idea though I'm not sure about changing things in > v13 as there's likely code out there that's already parsing that data > and it might suddenly break if this was changed. Agreed -- I won't backpatch anything to v13. > Given that such code would need to be adjusted for v14 anyway, I don't > really see changing it in v14 as as being an issue (nor do I feel that > it's even a big concern at this point in the release cycle, though > perhaps others feel differently). BTW, I noticed one thing about the track_io_time stuff. Sometimes it looks like this: I/O timings: i.e., it doesn't show anything at all after the colon. This happens because the instrumentation indicates that no time was spent on either read I/O or write I/O. I now wonder if we should just unconditionally report both things (both "read:" and "write:"), without regard for whether or not they're non-zero. (We'd do the same thing with ANALYZE's equivalent code too, if we actually did this -- same issue there.) -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: