Re: per backend WAL statistics

From: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: per backend WAL statistics
Date: 2025-03-10 12:08:49
Message-ID: CAN55FZ1idpJTyCDPMzbuXSD0UvxKETG652XyosHGJE5tLmKLLg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

Thank you for working on this!

I just started reading the code and have a couple of questions.

I think that every time we flush IO or WAL stats, we want(?) to flush
backend stats as well, so would it make sense to move
pgstat_flush_backend() calls to inside of pgstat_flush_io() and
pgstat_wal_flush_cb()? I see that backend statistics are not collected
for some of the backend types but that is already checked in the
pgstat_flush_backend() with pgstat_tracks_backend_bktype().

Also, is there a chance that wal_bytes gets incremented without
wal_records getting incremented? I searched the code and did not find
any example of that but I just wanted to be sure. If there is a case
like that, then pgstat_backend_wal_have_pending() needs to check
wal_bytes instead of wal_records.

--
Regards,
Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Microsoft

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2025-03-10 12:27:07 Re: pg_attribute_noreturn(), MSVC, C11
Previous Message Bertrand Drouvot 2025-03-10 11:52:26 Re: per backend WAL statistics