From: | bt21tanigaway <bt21tanigaway(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Fix pg_log_backend_memory_contexts() 's delay |
Date: | 2021-10-06 08:14:51 |
Message-ID: | 1accf2ba3912f3f59a60ef90b5411433@oss.nttdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thanks for your review.
>> Thanks for the patch. Do we also need to do the change in
>> HandleMainLoopInterrupts, HandleCheckpointerInterrupts,
>> HandlePgArchInterrupts, HandleWalWriterInterrupts as we don't call
>> CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() there?
> Yeah, that's still some information that the user asked for. Looking
> at the things that have a PGPROC entry, should we worry about the main
> loop of the logical replication launcher?
・Now, the target of “pg_log_backend_memory_contexts()” is “autovacuum
launcher” and “logical replication launcher”. I observed that the delay
occurred only in “autovacuum launcher” not in “logical replication
launcher”.
・”autovacuum launcher” used “HandleAutoVacLauncherInterrupts()” ( not
including “ProcessLogMemoryContextInterrupt()” ) instead of
“ProcessInterrupts() ( including “ProcessLogMemoryContextInterrupt()” ).
“ProcessLogMemoryContextInterrupt()” will not be executed until the next
“ProcessInterrupts()” is executed. So, I added
“ProcessLogMemoryContextInterrupt()”.
・”logical replication launcher” uses only “ProcessInterrupts()”. So, We
don’t have to fix it.
> IMHO, we can support all the processes which return a PGPROC entry by
> both BackendPidGetProc and AuxiliaryPidGetProc where the
> AuxiliaryPidGetProc would cover the following processes. I'm not sure
> one is interested in the memory context info of auxiliary processes.
・The purpose of this patch is to solve the delay problem, so I would
like another patch to deal with “ BackendPidGetProc” and
“AuxiliaryPidGetProc”.
Regards,
Koyu Tanigawa
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2021-10-06 08:24:29 | Re: More business with $Test::Builder::Level in the TAP tests |
Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2021-10-06 07:10:50 | Parallel vacuum workers prevent the oldest xmin from advancing |