Re: Replication slot stats misgivings

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Subject: Re: Replication slot stats misgivings
Date: 2021-04-14 02:48:33
Message-ID: CAA4eK1Jesa_G-NOHmV3cCO7Eg=GJt4AWVeFAVyDHoTaq3H-R7Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 8:04 AM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 7:52 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > I've not looked at the patches yet but as Amit mentioned before[1],
> > it's better to move 0002 patch to after 0004. That is, 0001 patch
> > changes data type to NameData, 0002 patch adds total_txn and
> > total_bytes, and 0003 patch adds regression tests. 0004 patch will be
> > the patch using HTAB (was 0002 patch) and get reviewed after pushing
> > 0001, 0002, and 0003 patches. 0005 patch adds more regression tests
> > for the problem 0004 patch addresses.
>
> I will make the change for this and post a patch for this.
> Currently we have kept total_txns and total_bytes at the beginning of
> pg_stat_replication_slots, I did not see any conclusion on this. I
> preferred it to be at the beginning.
> Thoughts?
>

I prefer those two fields after spill and stream fields. I have
mentioned the same in one of the emails above.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2021-04-14 03:06:56 Re: ModifyTable overheads in generic plans
Previous Message Craig Ringer 2021-04-14 02:45:16 Re: [PATCH] Identify LWLocks in tracepoints