| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Anthonin Bonnefoy <anthonin(dot)bonnefoy(at)datadoghq(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Flush SLRU counters in checkpointer process |
| Date: | 2023-01-11 16:33:17 |
| Message-ID: | 20230111163317.k2bgrd7xbyfhz3rm@awork3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2023-01-11 10:29:06 +0100, Anthonin Bonnefoy wrote:
> Currently, the Checkpointer process only reports SLRU statistics at server
> shutdown, leading to delayed statistics for SLRU flushes. This patch adds a
> flush of SLRU stats to the end of checkpoints.
Hm. I wonder if we should do this even earlier, by the
pgstat_report_checkpointer() calls in CheckpointWriteDelay().
I'm inclined to move the pgstat_report_wal() and pgstat_report_slru() calls
into pgstat_report_checkpointer() to avoid needing to care about all the
individual places.
> @@ -505,6 +505,7 @@ CheckpointerMain(void)
> /* Report pending statistics to the cumulative stats system */
> pgstat_report_checkpointer();
> pgstat_report_wal(true);
> + pgstat_report_slru(true);
Why do we need a force parameter if all callers use it?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | vignesh C | 2023-01-11 16:34:34 | Re: Allow logical replication to copy tables in binary format |
| Previous Message | vignesh C | 2023-01-11 16:32:37 | Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?) |