Re: per backend I/O statistics

From: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Subject: Re: per backend I/O statistics
Date: 2025-01-15 10:55:44
Message-ID: Z4eUMLFOjeKfW30u@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 06:27:22PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 08:30:20AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 11:03:54AM +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> >> With this commit it may not be possible to count IOs in the critical
> >> sections. I think the problem happens only if the local
> >> PgStat_BackendPending entry is being created for the first time for
> >> this backend in the critical section.
> >
> > Yeah, I encountered the exact same thing and mentioned it in [1] (see R1.).
> >
> > In [1] I did propose to use a new PendingBackendWalStats variable to "bypass" the
> > pgstat_prep_backend_pending() usage.
> >
> > Michael mentioned in [2] that is not really consistent with the rest (what I
> > agree with) and that "we should rethink a bit the way pending entries are
> > retrieved". I did not think about it yet but that might be the way to
> > go, thoughts?
> >
> > [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Z3zqc4o09dM/Ezyz%40ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal
> > [2]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Z4dRlNuhSQ3hPPv2%40paquier.xyz
>
> My problem is that this is not only related to backend stats, but to
> all variable-numbered stats kinds that require this behavior.

Yeah, agree that it's better to have a "generic" solution.

> A generic solution to the problem would be to allow
> pgStatPendingContext to have MemoryContextAllowInCriticalSection() set
> temporarily for the allocation of the pending data.
> Perhaps not for all stats kinds, just for these where we're OK with
> the potential memory footprint so we could have a flag in
> PgStat_KindInfo. Giving to all stats kinds the responsibility to
> allocate a pending entry beforehand outside a critical section is
> another option, but that means going through different tweaks for all
> stats kinds that require them.
>
> Andres, do you have any thoughts about that? Not sure what would be
> your view on this matter. MemoryContextAllowInCriticalSection() for
> stats kinds that allow the case would be OK for me I guess,

Same here, that looks ok to me too.

Regards,

--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Naylor 2025-01-15 10:56:44 Re: [PATCH] Hex-coding optimizations using SVE on ARM.
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2025-01-15 10:46:34 Re: CREATE TABLE NOT VALID for check and foreign key