RE: New statistics for tuning WAL buffer size

On 2020-08-18 16:35, tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com wrote:
> From: Masahiro Ikeda <ikedamsh@oss.nttdata.com>
>> It's important to provide the metrics for tuning the size of WAL 
>> buffers.
>> For now, it's lack of the statistics how often processes wait to write 
>> WAL
>> because WAL buffer is full.
>> 
>> If those situation are often occurred, WAL buffer is too small for the 
>> workload.
>> DBAs must to tune the WAL buffer size for performance improvement.
> 
> Yes, it's helpful to know if we need to enlarge the WAL buffer.
> That's why our colleague HariBabu proposed the patch.  We'd be happy
> if it could be committed in some form.
> 
>> There are related threads, but those are not merged.
>> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4FF824F3.5090407@uptime.jp
>> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAJrrPGc6APFUGYNcPe4qcNx
>> pL8gXKYv1KST%2BvwJcFtCSCEySnA%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> What's the difference between those patches?  What blocked them from
> being committed?

Thanks for replying.

Since the above threads are not active now and those patches can't be 
applied HEAD,
I made this thread. If it is better to reply the above thread, I will do 
so.

If my understanding is correct, we have to measure the performance 
impact first.
Do you know HariBabu is now trying to solve it? If not, I will try to 
modify patches to apply HEAD.

Regards,
-- 
Masahiro Ikeda
NTT DATA CORPORATION