From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
To: Masahiro Ikeda <ikedamsh@oss.nttdata.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Add statistics to pg_stat_wal view for wal related parameter tuning
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:01:41 +0900
Message-ID: <f9197102-4cb4-dfb6-02a4-b8e237c7699f@oss.nttdata.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7eb4ebd487b53200bde98ba2f0a7e789@oss.nttdata.com>
References: <35ef960128b90bfae3b3fdf60a3a860f@oss.nttdata.com>
<a7e4a0b8-7341-9393-2d24-ffd9a3b2f852@oss.nttdata.com>
<e3135545ffe792d6d636ebc40ebf022d@oss.nttdata.com>
<e28c5f5e-363e-70c1-a200-28a8798ed8e2@oss.nttdata.com>
<11e81f0b7d90dd69077d3d964a9a4da9@oss.nttdata.com>
<79620b5c-ecf1-3d4f-80b5-7e311b7a0662@oss.nttdata.com>
<89de5056627ebdd144967959bd789bd6@oss.nttdata.com>
<58ccc451-8429-ce44-f0b7-773c8dfedf45@oss.nttdata.com>
<7eb4ebd487b53200bde98ba2f0a7e789@oss.nttdata.com>
On 2020/11/26 16:07, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
> On 2020-11-25 20:19, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On 2020/11/19 16:31, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>> On 2020-11-17 11:46, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>> On 2020/11/16 16:35, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>>>> On 2020-11-12 14:58, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>>>> On 2020/11/06 10:25, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2020-10-30 11:50, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2020/10/29 17:03, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for your comments and advice. I updated the patch.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 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 Horiguchi-san's advice, I changed to reuse pgWalUsage
>>>>>>>>> which is already defined and eliminates the extra overhead.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> + /* 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_fpi = pgWalUsage.wal_fpi - prevWalUsage.wal_fpi;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's better to use WalUsageAccumDiff() here?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, thanks. I fixed it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> prevWalUsage needs to be initialized with pgWalUsage?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> + if (AmWalWriterProcess()){
>>>>>>>> + WalStats.m_wal_write_walwriter++;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> + else
>>>>>>>> + {
>>>>>>>> + WalStats.m_wal_write_backend++;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that it's better not to separate m_wal_write_xxx into two for
>>>>>>>> walwriter and other processes. Instead, we can use one m_wal_write_xxx
>>>>>>>> counter and make pgstat_send_wal() send also the process type to
>>>>>>>> the stats collector. Then the stats collector can accumulate the counters
>>>>>>>> per process type if necessary. If we adopt this approach, we can easily
>>>>>>>> extend pg_stat_wal so that any fields can be reported per process type.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'll remove the above source code because these counters are not useful.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2020-10-30 12:00, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2020/10/20 11:31, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think we need to add some statistics to pg_stat_wal view.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Although there are some parameter related WAL,
>>>>>>>>> there are few statistics for tuning them.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think it's better to provide the following statistics.
>>>>>>>>> Please let me know your comments.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ```
>>>>>>>>> postgres=# SELECT * from pg_stat_wal;
>>>>>>>>> -[ RECORD 1 ]-------+------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> wal_records | 2000224
>>>>>>>>> wal_fpi | 47
>>>>>>>>> wal_bytes | 248216337
>>>>>>>>> wal_buffers_full | 20954
>>>>>>>>> wal_init_file | 8
>>>>>>>>> wal_write_backend | 20960
>>>>>>>>> wal_write_walwriter | 46
>>>>>>>>> wal_write_time | 51
>>>>>>>>> wal_sync_backend | 7
>>>>>>>>> wal_sync_walwriter | 8
>>>>>>>>> wal_sync_time | 0
>>>>>>>>> stats_reset | 2020-10-20 11:04:51.307771+09
>>>>>>>>> ```
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. Basic statistics of WAL activity
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - wal_records: Total number of WAL records generated
>>>>>>>>> - wal_fpi: Total number of WAL full page images generated
>>>>>>>>> - wal_bytes: Total amount of WAL bytes generated
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To understand DB's performance, first, we will check the performance
>>>>>>>>> trends for the entire database instance.
>>>>>>>>> For example, if the number of wal_fpi becomes higher, users may tune
>>>>>>>>> "wal_compression", "checkpoint_timeout" and so on.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Although users can check the above statistics via EXPLAIN, auto_explain,
>>>>>>>>> autovacuum and pg_stat_statements now,
>>>>>>>>> if users want to see the performance trends for the entire database,
>>>>>>>>> they must recalculate the statistics.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think it is useful to add the sum of the basic statistics.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2. WAL segment file creation
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - wal_init_file: Total number of WAL segment files created.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To create a new WAL file may have an impact on the performance of
>>>>>>>>> a write-heavy workload generating lots of WAL. If this number is reported high,
>>>>>>>>> to reduce the number of this initialization, we can tune WAL-related parameters
>>>>>>>>> so that more "recycled" WAL files can be held.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 3. Number of when WAL is flushed
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - wal_write_backend : Total number of WAL data written to the disk by backends
>>>>>>>>> - wal_write_walwriter : Total number of WAL data written to the disk by walwriter
>>>>>>>>> - wal_sync_backend : Total number of WAL data synced to the disk by backends
>>>>>>>>> - wal_sync_walwriter : Total number of WAL data synced to the disk by walwrite
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think it's useful for tuning "synchronous_commit" and "commit_delay" for query executions.
>>>>>>>>> If the number of WAL is flushed is high, users can know "synchronous_commit" is useful for the workload.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I just wonder how useful these counters are. Even without these counters,
>>>>>>>> we already know synchronous_commit=off is likely to cause the better
>>>>>>>> performance (but has the risk of data loss). So ISTM that these counters are
>>>>>>>> not so useful when tuning synchronous_commit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks, my understanding was wrong.
>>>>>>> I agreed that your comments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I merged the statistics of *_backend and *_walwriter.
>>>>>>> I think the sum of them is useful to calculate the average per write/sync time.
>>>>>>> For example, per write time is equals wal_write_time / wal_write.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Understood.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for updating the patch!
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your comments.
>>>>>
>>>>>> patching file src/include/catalog/pg_proc.dat
>>>>>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 5491.
>>>>>> 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file
>>>>>> src/include/catalog/pg_proc.dat.rej
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I got this failure when applying the patch. Could you update the patch?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, I updated the patch.
>>>>>
>>>>>> - Number of times WAL data was written to the disk because WAL
>>>>>> buffers got full
>>>>>> + Total number of times WAL data written to the disk because WAL
>>>>>> buffers got full
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Isn't "was" necessary between "data" and "written"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I fixed it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + <entry role="catalog_table_entry"><para role="column_definition">
>>>>>> + <structfield>wal_bytes</structfield> <type>bigint</type>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Shouldn't the type of wal_bytes be numeric because the total number of
>>>>>> WAL bytes can exceed the range of bigint? I think that the type of
>>>>>> pg_stat_statements.wal_bytes is also numeric for the same reason.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, I fixed it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since I cast the type of wal_bytes from PgStat_Counter to uint64,
>>>>> I changed the type of PgStat_MsgWal and PgStat_WalStats too.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + <entry role="catalog_table_entry"><para role="column_definition">
>>>>>> + <structfield>wal_write_time</structfield> <type>bigint</type>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Shouldn't the type of wal_xxx_time be double precision,
>>>>>> like pg_stat_database.blk_write_time?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, I changed it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Even when fsync is set to off or wal_sync_method is set to open_sync,
>>>>>> wal_sync is incremented. Isn't this behavior confusing?
>>>>
>>>> What do you think about this comment?
>>>
>>> Sorry, I'll change to increment wal_sync and wal_sync_time only
>>> if a specific fsync method is called.
>>>
>>>> I found that we discussed track-WAL-IO-timing feature at the past discussion
>>>> about the similar feature [1]. But the feature was droppped from the proposal
>>>> patch because there was the performance concern. So probably we need to
>>>> revisit the past discussion and benchmark the performance. Thought?
>>>>
>>>> If track-WAL-IO-timing feature may cause performance regression,
>>>> it might be an idea to extract wal_records, wal_fpi and wal_bytes parts
>>>> from the patch and commit it at first.
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> https://postgr.es/m/CAJrrPGc6APFUGYNcPe4qcNxpL8gXKYv1KST+vwJcFtCSCEySnA@mail.gmail.com
>>>
>>> Thanks, I'll check the thread.
>>> I agree to add basic statistics at first and I attached the patch.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> + /* Send WAL statistics */
>> + pgstat_send_wal();
>>
>> This is not necessary because walwriter generates no WAL data?
>
> No, it's not necessary.
> Thanks. I fixed it.
Thanks for updating the patch! I applied cosmetic changes to it.
For example, I added more comments. Patch attached.
Barring no objection, I will commit this patch.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Attachments:0002_add_basic_statistics_to_pg_stat_wal_view_fujii.patch (text/plain, 8.9K) downloaddiff --git a/doc/src/sgml/monitoring.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/monitoring.sgmlindex 98e1995453..6e661d6fae 100644--- a/doc/src/sgml/monitoring.sgml+++ b/doc/src/sgml/monitoring.sgml@@ -3447,6 +3447,33 @@ SELECT pid, wait_event_type, wait_event FROM pg_stat_activity WHERE wait_event i
</thead>
<tbody>
+ <row>+ <entry role="catalog_table_entry"><para role="column_definition">+ <structfield>wal_records</structfield> <type>bigint</type>+ </para>+ <para>+ Total number of WAL records generated+ </para></entry>+ </row>++ <row>+ <entry role="catalog_table_entry"><para role="column_definition">+ <structfield>wal_fpi</structfield> <type>bigint</type>+ </para>+ <para>+ Total number of WAL full page images generated+ </para></entry>+ </row>++ <row>+ <entry role="catalog_table_entry"><para role="column_definition">+ <structfield>wal_bytes</structfield> <type>numeric</type>+ </para>+ <para>+ Total amount of WAL bytes generated+ </para></entry>+ </row>+
<row>
<entry role="catalog_table_entry"><para role="column_definition">
<structfield>wal_buffers_full</structfield> <type>bigint</type>
diff --git a/src/backend/catalog/system_views.sql b/src/backend/catalog/system_views.sqlindex 2e4aa1c4b6..b140c210bc 100644--- a/src/backend/catalog/system_views.sql+++ b/src/backend/catalog/system_views.sql@@ -993,6 +993,9 @@ CREATE VIEW pg_stat_bgwriter AS
CREATE VIEW pg_stat_wal AS
SELECT
+ w.wal_records,+ w.wal_fpi,+ w.wal_bytes,
w.wal_buffers_full,
w.stats_reset
FROM pg_stat_get_wal() w;
diff --git a/src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.c b/src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.cindex e76e627c6b..9bad14981b 100644--- a/src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.c+++ b/src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.c@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@
#include "catalog/pg_database.h"
#include "catalog/pg_proc.h"
#include "common/ip.h"
+#include "executor/instrument.h"
#include "libpq/libpq.h"
#include "libpq/pqsignal.h"
#include "mb/pg_wchar.h"
@@ -143,6 +144,14 @@ char *pgstat_stat_tmpname = NULL;
PgStat_MsgBgWriter BgWriterStats;
PgStat_MsgWal WalStats;
+/*+ * WAL usage counters saved from pgWALUsage at the previous call to+ * pgstat_send_wal(). This is used to calculate how much WAL usage+ * happens between pgstat_send_wal() calls, by substracting+ * the previous counters from the current ones.+ */+static WalUsage prevWalUsage;+
/*
* List of SLRU names that we keep stats for. There is no central registry of
* SLRUs, so we use this fixed list instead. The "other" entry is used for
@@ -3048,6 +3057,13 @@ pgstat_initialize(void)
MyBEEntry = &BackendStatusArray[MaxBackends + MyAuxProcType];
}
+ /*+ * Initialize prevWalUsage with pgWalUsage so that pgstat_send_wal() can+ * calculate how much pgWalUsage counters are increased by substracting+ * prevWalUsage from pgWalUsage.+ */+ prevWalUsage = pgWalUsage;+
/* Set up a process-exit hook to clean up */
on_shmem_exit(pgstat_beshutdown_hook, 0);
}
@@ -4577,6 +4593,20 @@ pgstat_send_wal(void)
/* We assume this initializes to zeroes */
static const PgStat_MsgWal all_zeroes;
+ WalUsage walusage;++ /*+ * Calculate how much WAL usage counters are increased by substracting the+ * previous counters from the current ones. Fill the results in WAL stats+ * message.+ */+ MemSet(&walusage, 0, sizeof(WalUsage));+ WalUsageAccumDiff(&walusage, &pgWalUsage, &prevWalUsage);++ WalStats.m_wal_records = walusage.wal_records;+ WalStats.m_wal_fpi = walusage.wal_fpi;+ WalStats.m_wal_bytes = walusage.wal_bytes;+
/*
* This function can be called even if nothing at all has happened. In
* this case, avoid sending a completely empty message to the stats
@@ -4591,6 +4621,11 @@ pgstat_send_wal(void)
pgstat_setheader(&WalStats.m_hdr, PGSTAT_MTYPE_WAL);
pgstat_send(&WalStats, sizeof(WalStats));
+ /*+ * Save the current counters for the subsequent calculation of WAL usage.+ */+ prevWalUsage = pgWalUsage;+
/*
* Clear out the statistics buffer, so it can be re-used.
*/
@@ -6759,6 +6794,9 @@ pgstat_recv_bgwriter(PgStat_MsgBgWriter *msg, int len)
static void
pgstat_recv_wal(PgStat_MsgWal *msg, int len)
{
+ walStats.wal_records += msg->m_wal_records;+ walStats.wal_fpi += msg->m_wal_fpi;+ walStats.wal_bytes += msg->m_wal_bytes;
walStats.wal_buffers_full += msg->m_wal_buffers_full;
}
diff --git a/src/backend/utils/adt/pgstatfuncs.c b/src/backend/utils/adt/pgstatfuncs.cindex a210fc93b4..6afe1b6f56 100644--- a/src/backend/utils/adt/pgstatfuncs.c+++ b/src/backend/utils/adt/pgstatfuncs.c@@ -1703,10 +1703,11 @@ pg_stat_get_buf_alloc(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
Datum
pg_stat_get_wal(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
{
-#define PG_STAT_GET_WAL_COLS 2+#define PG_STAT_GET_WAL_COLS 5
TupleDesc tupdesc;
Datum values[PG_STAT_GET_WAL_COLS];
bool nulls[PG_STAT_GET_WAL_COLS];
+ char buf[256];
PgStat_WalStats *wal_stats;
/* Initialise values and NULL flags arrays */
@@ -1715,9 +1716,15 @@ pg_stat_get_wal(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
/* Initialise attributes information in the tuple descriptor */
tupdesc = CreateTemplateTupleDesc(PG_STAT_GET_WAL_COLS);
- TupleDescInitEntry(tupdesc, (AttrNumber) 1, "wal_buffers_full",+ TupleDescInitEntry(tupdesc, (AttrNumber) 1, "wal_records",
INT8OID, -1, 0);
- TupleDescInitEntry(tupdesc, (AttrNumber) 2, "stats_reset",+ TupleDescInitEntry(tupdesc, (AttrNumber) 2, "wal_fpi",+ INT8OID, -1, 0);+ TupleDescInitEntry(tupdesc, (AttrNumber) 3, "wal_bytes",+ NUMERICOID, -1, 0);+ TupleDescInitEntry(tupdesc, (AttrNumber) 4, "wal_buffers_full",+ INT8OID, -1, 0);+ TupleDescInitEntry(tupdesc, (AttrNumber) 5, "stats_reset",
TIMESTAMPTZOID, -1, 0);
BlessTupleDesc(tupdesc);
@@ -1726,8 +1733,18 @@ pg_stat_get_wal(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
wal_stats = pgstat_fetch_stat_wal();
/* Fill values and NULLs */
- values[0] = Int64GetDatum(wal_stats->wal_buffers_full);- values[1] = TimestampTzGetDatum(wal_stats->stat_reset_timestamp);+ values[0] = Int64GetDatum(wal_stats->wal_records);+ values[1] = Int64GetDatum(wal_stats->wal_fpi);++ /* Convert to numeric. */+ snprintf(buf, sizeof buf, UINT64_FORMAT, wal_stats->wal_bytes);+ values[2] = DirectFunctionCall3(numeric_in,+ CStringGetDatum(buf),+ ObjectIdGetDatum(0),+ Int32GetDatum(-1));++ values[3] = Int64GetDatum(wal_stats->wal_buffers_full);+ values[4] = TimestampTzGetDatum(wal_stats->stat_reset_timestamp);
/* Returns the record as Datum */
PG_RETURN_DATUM(HeapTupleGetDatum(heap_form_tuple(tupdesc, values, nulls)));
diff --git a/src/include/catalog/pg_proc.dat b/src/include/catalog/pg_proc.datindex e7fbda9f81..fc2202b843 100644--- a/src/include/catalog/pg_proc.dat+++ b/src/include/catalog/pg_proc.dat@@ -5500,8 +5500,9 @@
{ oid => '1136', descr => 'statistics: information about WAL activity',
proname => 'pg_stat_get_wal', proisstrict => 'f', provolatile => 's',
proparallel => 'r', prorettype => 'record', proargtypes => '',
- proallargtypes => '{int8,timestamptz}', proargmodes => '{o,o}',- proargnames => '{wal_buffers_full,stats_reset}',+ proallargtypes => '{int8,int8,numeric,int8,timestamptz}',+ proargmodes => '{o,o,o,o,o}',+ proargnames => '{wal_records,wal_fpi,wal_bytes,wal_buffers_full,stats_reset}',
prosrc => 'pg_stat_get_wal' },
{ oid => '2306', descr => 'statistics: information about SLRU caches',
diff --git a/src/include/pgstat.h b/src/include/pgstat.hindex 257e515bfe..5954068dec 100644--- a/src/include/pgstat.h+++ b/src/include/pgstat.h@@ -459,6 +459,9 @@ typedef struct PgStat_MsgBgWriter
typedef struct PgStat_MsgWal
{
PgStat_MsgHdr m_hdr;
+ PgStat_Counter m_wal_records;+ PgStat_Counter m_wal_fpi;+ uint64 m_wal_bytes;
PgStat_Counter m_wal_buffers_full;
} PgStat_MsgWal;
@@ -798,6 +801,9 @@ typedef struct PgStat_GlobalStats
*/
typedef struct PgStat_WalStats
{
+ PgStat_Counter wal_records;+ PgStat_Counter wal_fpi;+ uint64 wal_bytes;
PgStat_Counter wal_buffers_full;
TimestampTz stat_reset_timestamp;
} PgStat_WalStats;
diff --git a/src/test/regress/expected/rules.out b/src/test/regress/expected/rules.outindex 097ff5d111..6293ab57bc 100644--- a/src/test/regress/expected/rules.out+++ b/src/test/regress/expected/rules.out@@ -2138,9 +2138,12 @@ pg_stat_user_tables| SELECT pg_stat_all_tables.relid,
pg_stat_all_tables.autoanalyze_count
FROM pg_stat_all_tables
WHERE ((pg_stat_all_tables.schemaname <> ALL (ARRAY['pg_catalog'::name, 'information_schema'::name])) AND (pg_stat_all_tables.schemaname !~ '^pg_toast'::text));
-pg_stat_wal| SELECT w.wal_buffers_full,+pg_stat_wal| SELECT w.wal_records,+ w.wal_fpi,+ w.wal_bytes,+ w.wal_buffers_full,
w.stats_reset
- FROM pg_stat_get_wal() w(wal_buffers_full, stats_reset);+ FROM pg_stat_get_wal() w(wal_records, wal_fpi, wal_bytes, wal_buffers_full, stats_reset);
pg_stat_wal_receiver| SELECT s.pid,
s.status,
s.receive_start_lsn,
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: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com, ikedamsh@oss.nttdata.com
Subject: Re: Add statistics to pg_stat_wal view for wal related parameter tuning
In-Reply-To: <f9197102-4cb4-dfb6-02a4-b8e237c7699f@oss.nttdata.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox