public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: per backend WAL statistics
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2025 11:16:15 +0900
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<xibh465r3x7xvpzaozu47fxule3dktvwz4yacce4pjlw76lkjd@fjvm56zbev37>
	<Z4k9rb3aTNVSmyq/@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
	<aj5vdgpbux5e2dbr6gcgd4eu3krjrflljt2neivh2vbkfrlant@2qedfymz7lmh>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>

On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 08:49:41AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> I think that: 
> 
> wal_write (and wal_write_time)
> wal_sync (and wal_sync_time)

Right.  We are not able to get this data from XLogWrite() and
issue_xlog_fsync(), so there is no need to duplicate that anymore in
your patch.

> can be extracted from pg_stat_get_backend_io(), so there is no need to duplicate
> this information. The same comment could be done for pg_stat_wal and pg_stat_io
> though, but pg_stat_wal already exists so removing fields has not the same
> effect.
> 
> What are you thoughts about keeping in pg_stat_get_backend_wal() only the
> 4 stats mentioned above?

wal_buffers_full is incremented in AdvanceXLInsertBuffer(), part of
PendingWalStats.  wal_records, wal_fpi and wal_bytes are part of the
instrumentation field.  It looks to me that if you discard the
wal_buffers_full part, the implementation of the data in the backend
could just be tied to the fields coming from WalUsage.

Actually, could it actually be useful to have wal_buffers_full be
available in WalUsage, so as it would show up in EXPLAIN in a
per-query basis with show_wal_usage()?  Consolidating that would make
what you are trying it a bit easier, because we would have the
WalUsage and the pg_stat_io parts without any of the PendingWalStats
part.  And it is just a counter not that expensive to handle, like the
data for records, fpis and bytes.  This extra information could be
useful to have in the context of an EXPLAIN.
--
Michael


Attachments:

  [application/pgp-signature] signature.asc (833B, ../[email protected]/2-signature.asc)
  download

view thread (20+ 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]
  Subject: Re: per backend WAL statistics
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* 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