From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
cc: Laetitia Avrot <laetitia.avrot@gmail.com>,
        Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>,
        Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>,
        "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>,
        John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com>,
        PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Statistics updates is delayed when using `commit and chain`
In-reply-to: <20220801171051.vxnit2t6soddaquh@awork3.anarazel.de>
References: 
 <CAKFQuwaTDMYW0v2cv+CxLfnyJ_OAh=Pc0YKvD8f3xc3DtB_LHQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKFQuwZSi6vWEUtZKQhqzHj8FeWtgon=HJ-BGLfpRwjErpwKGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <MEYP282MB16691F2B962B05BB1AC5C151B6139@MEYP282MB1669.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <CAB_COdjhzA+9URWOekr3s=J-+kMsUQDcjae2rF00Z5X-jDKzuA@mail.gmail.com>
 <MEYP282MB16691A6E80DF769F04BF9EB0B6E99@MEYP282MB1669.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <CAB_COdiHgHsUb7qxftTe9S-fagXr3Xv+Grw5rcdjwvu2pYy1uA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220801161256.ogcacmw6txiecvfb@awork3.anarazel.de>
 <1839632.1659371158@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20220801164004.kybukw4j3svgcv54@awork3.anarazel.de>
 <1845220.1659372203@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20220801171051.vxnit2t6soddaquh@awork3.anarazel.de>
Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
	message dated "Mon, 01 Aug 2022 10:10:51 -0700"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1856492.1659374555.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2022 13:22:35 -0400
Message-ID: <1856493.1659374555@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1856493.1659374555%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2022-08-01 12:43:23 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah.  I think we'd need to get rid of the "bool force" argument
>> of pgstat_report_stat, and instead have it manage things internally
>> based on understanding whether the current process uses a reporting
>> timeout timer or not (if not, always send the report right away).

> It's not as simple as looking at the backend type, I think. We'd not wan=
t to
> enable a timer in the commit-and-chain context, even in a normal backend=
 -
> there's no chance we'll go idle.

No, but that's not the point.  During CommitTransaction we should check
to see if it's more than X amount of time since our last stats report,
and if so send a new one.  No timer interaction involved there.  When
we go idle, if not inside a transaction and a report needs to be sent,
then compute the wait time till it should be sent and set a timer for
that.

> I wonder if it was the wrong call to use timers for IdleSessionTimeout,
> IdleInTransactionSessionTimeout and pgstats. We always use nonblocking s=
ocket
> IO these days, so perhaps we should instead just compute a relevant time=
out
> for the WaitEventSetWait() call?

Meh.  I think that that would end up with duplicative logic and
duplicative gettimeofday calls, unless your idea is to get rid of
the timeout.c facilities altogether.

			regards, tom lane