| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Odd off-by-one dirty buffers and checkpoint buffers written |
| Date: | 2022-04-20 13:50:36 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwYYjXEEvmj0ZJNTyHVvUWwOf_Y8CU5RhS+-M6+qFG105Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 1:03 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> The reason for the 2 hits of Xact SLRU is that once for visibility
> (MVCC) check and another for commit.
>
>
Makes sense. Thanks. Now, is the lack of such a detail when looking at
pg_stat_slru (for this and the other 6 named caches) an omission by intent
or just no one has taken the time to write up what the different caches are
holding? I would think a brief sentence for each followed by a link to the
main section describing the feature would be decent content to add to the
introduction for the view in 28.2.21.
Also, is "other" ever expected to be something besides all zeros?
Thanks!
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | bucoo@sohu.com | 2022-04-20 14:00:46 | Re: Re: fix cost subqueryscan wrong parallel cost |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2022-04-20 13:39:25 | Re: Bad estimate with partial index |