Re: pgBufferUsage.blk_{read|write}_time are zero although there are pgBufferUsage.local_blks_{read|written}
От | hubert depesz lubaczewski |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgBufferUsage.blk_{read|write}_time are zero although there are pgBufferUsage.local_blks_{read|written} |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ZT+6OMpG3Mmby1oa@depesz.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgBufferUsage.blk_{read|write}_time are zero although there are pgBufferUsage.local_blks_{read|written} (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgBufferUsage.blk_{read|write}_time are zero although there are pgBufferUsage.local_blks_{read|written}
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 10:45:05AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 04:58:20PM +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote: > > I think switching it to 'shared' makes sense. That shouldn't confuse > > existing monitoring queries much as the numbers won't change, right? > > Also, if we keep 'shared/local' there could be similar complaints to > > this thread in the future; so, at least adding comments can be > > helpful. > > The problem is that it may impact existing tools that do explain > output deparsing. One of them is https://explain.depesz.com/ that > Hubert Depesz Lubaczewski has implemented, and it would be sad to > break anything related to it. > > I am adding Hubert in CC for comments about changing this > "shared/local" to "shared" on a released branch. Knowing that > "shared" and "local" will need to be handled as separate terms in 17~ > anyway, perhaps that's not a big deal, but let's be sure. Hi, some things will definitely break, but that's 100% OK. The change seems needed, and I can update my parser to deal with it :) Best regards, depesz
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: