public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Fujii Masao <[email protected]>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <[email protected]>
Cc: Sami Imseih <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Zsolt Parragi <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Flush some statistics within running transactions
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2026 21:12:18 +0900
Message-ID: <CAHGQGwHttst8tv_WWYNoGGfL1UAq4kiy6dpFXoxEkJwHMS9FtQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<CAA5RZ0t6j0VYuUpxZ8JLq-ERoUriZ0rK=+8PCUtjRirmSmCx7A@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAA5RZ0s9j3x5UPpgaQdDyGA=MNjVEkT73SL7LMoVEKUwiZrVqA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAA5RZ0s6FkEHFdgKf8J6vueZGwsH+08LvV0YPBXa4Dw_8QgtTw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAA5RZ0sQxAu6bU8wTgvs+aTSvhBcziH9jCJ27aS1hzKsm2kmTQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAHGQGwGBkPEK=NpLuk1HSmccu6OA2FYqkkGcA-Hb3WLs6dX=cg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 4:43 PM Bertrand Drouvot
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 10:56:48AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 10:41 AM Sami Imseih <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Sure, Bertrand mentioned early in the thread that the anytime flushes
> > > could be made configurable. Perhaps that is a good idea where we can
> > > default with something large like 10s intervals for anytime flushes, but allow
> > > the user to configure a more frequent flushes ( although I would think
> > > that 1 sec is the minimum we should allow ).
> >
> > +1 on adding an option to control the interval. With a fixed interval
> > (for example, 1s), log_lock_waits messages could be emitted that frequently,
> > which may be annoying for some users.
> >
> > Of course, it would be even better if these periodic wakeups did not trigger
> > log_lock_waits messages at all, though.
>
> pgstat_report_anytime_stat() is called with the force parameter set to false,
> means that the flushes are done with nowait = true means that LWLockConditionalAcquire()
> is used. In that case, do you still see cases where log_lock_waits messages could
> be triggered due to the new flush?
I haven't read the patch in detail yet, but after applying patch 0001 and
causing a lock wait (for example, using the steps below), I observed that
log_lock_waits messages are emitted every second.
[session 1]
create table tbl as select id from generate_series(1, 10) id;
begin;
select * from tbl where id = 1 for update;
[session 2]
begin;
select * from tbl where id = 1 for update;
With this setup, the following messages were logged once per second:
LOG: process 72199 still waiting for ShareLock on transaction 771
after 63034.119 ms
DETAIL: Process holding the lock: 72190. Wait queue: 72199.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
view thread (27+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Flush some statistics within running transactions
In-Reply-To: <CAHGQGwHttst8tv_WWYNoGGfL1UAq4kiy6dpFXoxEkJwHMS9FtQ@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox