| From: | Benoit Lobréau <benoit(dot)lobreau(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Parallel workers stats in pg_stat_database |
| Date: | 2024-09-04 15:25:41 |
| Message-ID: | 22b54026-e0fa-491d-918f-771cb50c1221@dalibo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/4/24 08:46, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:> What about moving the tests to
places where it's "guaranteed" to get
> parallel workers involved? For example, a "parallel_maint_workers" only test
> could be done in vacuum_parallel.sql.
Thank you ! I was too focussed on the stat part and missed the obvious.
It's indeed better with this file.
... Which led me to discover that the area I choose to gather my stats
is wrong (parallel_vacuum_end), it only traps workers allocated for
parallel_vacuum_cleanup_all_indexes() and not
parallel_vacuum_bulkdel_all_indexes().
Back to the drawing board...
--
Benoit Lobréau
Consultant
http://dalibo.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nitin Motiani | 2024-09-04 15:30:32 | Re: race condition in pg_class |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2024-09-04 15:12:48 | Re: scalability bottlenecks with (many) partitions (and more) |