From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Monitoring time of fsyncing WALs |
Date: | 2018-06-28 02:27:21 |
Message-ID: | 20180628022721.GC11054@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 07:32:18PM +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> I wonder why we are monitoring time of writing to WAL, but not time of
> fsyncing WAL segments?
> Is there are principle reason for it or just because nobody added it yet?
> If so, please find very small patch which adding WAIT_EVENT_WAL_FSYNC event
> type.
Let's name it WAIT_EVENT_WAL_SYNC as it is more consistent with the
other wait events of the same type, and also list the wait event
alphabetically everywhere this is added. I have also reworded the
documentation to be more consistent.
> Our engineers in PgPro complain me that there is no information about time
> spent in syncing WALs...
> Unfortunately Postgres still is not able to aggregate this statistic. But at
> least we have pg_wait_sampling extension for it:
> https://github.com/postgrespro/pg_wait_sampling
Complain justified. It is a bit too late for v11 I think though, so
let's wait for v12 to open for business, and then I'll apply the patch
at if there are no objections until then.
Attached is an updated patch.
--
Michael
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
wait_event_wal_fsync-v2.patch | text/x-diff | 2.2 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2018-06-28 02:39:46 | Re: jsonpath |
Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2018-06-28 02:26:37 | Re: Remove mention in docs that foreign keys on partitioned tables are not supported |