Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com, vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com, pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com, lukas(at)fittl(dot)com, alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org, magnus(at)hagander(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com, m(dot)sakrejda(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)
Date: 2023-02-14 19:08:12
Message-ID: 20230214190812.m43wjzgsxbijkm52@awork3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2023-02-11 10:24:37 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> Just pushed the actual pg_stat_io view, the splitting of the tablespace test,
> and the pg_stat_io tests.

One thing I started to wonder about since is whether we should remove the io_
prefix from io_object, io_context. The prefixes make sense on the C level, but
it's not clear to me that that's also the case on the table level.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2023-02-14 19:21:33 Re: pg_dump versus hash partitioning
Previous Message Andres Freund 2023-02-14 18:11:21 Re: Force testing of query jumbling code in TAP tests