Re: Track the amount of time waiting due to cost_delay

On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 10:14:48AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 02:05:51PM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> Barring objections, I am planning to commit this one soon. I might move
>> the addition of analyze_delay_point() to its own patch, but otherwise I
>> think it looks good to go.
>
> Yeah, I think that having analyze_delay_point() in its own patch makes sense.
> It's done that way in the attached and allows 0002 to be focus on the main
> feature.

Here is what I have prepared for commit. Other expanding the commit
messages, I've modified 0001 to just add a parameter to
vacuum_delay_point() to indicate whether this is a vacuum or analyze. I
was worried that adding an analyze_delay_point() could cause third-party
code to miss this change. We want such code to correctly indicate the type
of operation so that the progress views work for them, too.

Off-list, I've asked Bertrand to gauge the feasibility of adding this
information to the autovacuum logs and to VACUUM/ANALYZE (VERBOSE). IMHO
those are natural places to surface this information, and I want to ensure
that we're not painting ourselves into a corner with the approach we're
using for the progress views.

--
nathan