Re: [BUG]: the walsender does not update its IO statistics until it exits
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [BUG]: the walsender does not update its IO statistics until it exits |
Дата | |
Msg-id | aNuItf5d5_xXpOsB@paquier.xyz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [BUG]: the walsender does not update its IO statistics until it exits (Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [BUG]: the walsender does not update its IO statistics until it exits
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 07:14:14AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 12:09:46PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Agreed that something in the lines of non-transaction update of the >> entries could be adapted in some cases, so +1 for the idea. I suspect >> that there would be cases where a single stats kind should be able to >> handle both transactional and non-transactional flush cases. >> Splitting that across two stats kinds would lead to a lot of >> duplication. > > One option could be to use 2 pending lists for the variables stats and 2 flush > callbacks for fixed stats. Thoughts? Hmm. I would have thought first about one pending area, and two callbacks for the variable-sized stats, called with a different timing because the stats to be flushed are the same aren't they? For example, if we are in a long analytical query, we would flush the IO stats periodically, reset the pending data, repeat/rinse periodically, and do a last round when we are done with the query in postgres.c. Do we really need a second callback by the way? It could be as well the same flush callback, with an option to mark stats kinds that allow a periodic flush. The trick is knowing where the new reports calls should happen. The executor is the primary target area. Or perhaps you think that the pending data of a stats kind could be different if a kind allows transactional and non-transactional flushes? -- Michael
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: