Re: Vacuum statistics

On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 at 07:48, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 6:37 AM Alena Rybakina
> <a(dot)rybakina(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> >
> > We check it there: "tabentry->vacuum_ext.type != type". Or were you talking about something else?
> >
> > On 19.08.2024 12:32, jian he wrote:
> >
> > in pg_stats_vacuum
> > if (type == PGSTAT_EXTVAC_INDEX || type == PGSTAT_EXTVAC_HEAP)
> > {
> > Oid relid = PG_GETARG_OID(1);
> >
> > /* Load table statistics for specified database. */
> > if (OidIsValid(relid))
> > {
> > tabentry = fetch_dbstat_tabentry(dbid, relid);
> > if (tabentry == NULL || tabentry->vacuum_ext.type != type)
> > /* Table don't exists or isn't an heap relation. */
> > PG_RETURN_NULL();
> >
> > tuplestore_put_for_relation(relid, rsinfo, tabentry);
> > }
> > else
> > {
> > }
> >
> >
> > So for functions pg_stat_vacuum_indexes and pg_stat_vacuum_tables,
> > it seems you didn't check "relid" 's relkind,
> > you may need to use get_rel_relkind.
> >
> > --
>
> hi.
> I mentioned some points at [1],
> Please check the attached patchset to address these issues.
>
> there are four occurrences of "CurrentDatabaseId", i am still confused
> with usage of CurrentDatabaseId.
>
> also please don't top-post, otherwise the archive, like [2] is not
> easier to read for future readers.
> generally you quote first, then reply.
>
> [1] https://postgr.es/m/CACJufxHb_YGCp=pVH6DZcpk9yML+SueffPeaRbX2LzXZVahd_w@mail.gmail.com
> [2] https://postgr.es/m/78394e29-a900-4af4-b5ce-d6eb2d263fad@postgrespro.ru

Hi, your points are valid.
Regarding 0003, I also wanted to object database naming in a
regression test during my review but for some reason didn't.Now, as
soon as we already need to change it, I suggest we also change
regression_statistic_vacuum_db1 to something less generic. Maybe
regression_statistic_vacuum_db_unaffected.

--
Best regards,
Kirill Reshke