MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 10:44:53 +0900
From: Masahiro Ikeda <ikedamsh@oss.nttdata.com>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Cc: amit.kapila16@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Add statistics to pg_stat_wal view for wal related parameter
 tuning
In-Reply-To: <20201021.180323.1892401452849353942.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
References: <35ef960128b90bfae3b3fdf60a3a860f@oss.nttdata.com>
 <CAA4eK1JbbP-QmZWiXwK+H-ZauJCGR6vbAVoGdyx_TTxRPuXzhQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <06bc2d405b086a72fb14657de9befae8@oss.nttdata.com>
 <20201021.180323.1892401452849353942.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <729d83f87da2cfbca4343e577f2e20a1@oss.nttdata.com>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.1.9
Precedence: bulk

On 2020-10-21 18:03, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:11:29 +0900, Masahiro Ikeda
> <ikedamsh@oss.nttdata.com> wrote in
>> On 2020-10-20 12:46, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> > I see that we also need to add extra code to capture these stats (some
>> > of which is in performance-critical path especially in
>> > XLogInsertRecord) which again makes me a bit uncomfortable. It might
>> > be that it is all fine as it is very important to collect these stats
>> > at cluster-level in spite that the same information can be gathered at
>> > statement-level to help customers but I don't see a very strong case
>> > for that in your proposal.
> 
> We should avoid that duplication as possible even if the both number
> are important.
> 
>> Also about performance, I thought there are few impacts because it
>> increments stats in memory. If I can implement to reuse pgWalUsage's
>> value which already collects these stats, there is no impact in
>> XLogInsertRecord.
>> For example, how about pg_stat_wal() calculates the accumulated
>> value of wal_records, wal_fpi, and wal_bytes to use pgWalUsage's
>> value?
> 
> I don't think that works, but it would work that pgstat_send_wal()
> takes the difference of that values between two successive calls.
> 
> WalUsage prevWalUsage;
> ...
> pgstat_send_wal()
> {
> ..
>    /* fill in some values using pgWalUsage */
>    WalStats.m_wal_bytes   = pgWalUsage.wal_bytes   - 
> prevWalUsage.wal_bytes;
>    WalStats.m_wal_records = pgWalUsage.wal_records - 
> prevWalUsage.wal_records;
>    WalStats.m_wal_wal_fpi = pgWalUsage.wal_fpi     - 
> prevWalUsage.wal_fpi;
> ...
>    pgstat_send(&WalStats, sizeof(WalStats));
> 
>    /* remember the current numbers */
>    prevWalUsage = pgWalUsage;

Thanks for your advice. This code can avoid the performance impact of 
critical code.

By the way, what do you think to add these statistics to the pg_stat_wal 
view?
I thought to remove the above statistics because there is advice that 
PG13's features,
for example, pg_stat_statement view, vacuum log, and so on can cover 
use-cases.

regards,
-- 
Masahiro Ikeda
NTT DATA CORPORATION