Re: Monitoring gaps in XLogWalRcvWrite() for the WAL receiver

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Monitoring gaps in XLogWalRcvWrite() for the WAL receiver
Date: 2025-03-05 12:28:23
Message-ID: Z8hDZ6jJ69q0WxTd@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 08:04:44AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 12:35:26PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Also for sync? sync looks fine as issue_xlog_fsync() is being called in
> XLogWalRcvFlush(), no?

Yes, we're OK for the sync data aggregated in the WAL receiver on
HEAD, as mentioned below, not in the back-branches.

> We're not emitting some statistics, so I think that it's hard for users to
> complain about something they don't/can't see.

One would see idle data in pg_stat_wal on a standby, so the lack of
data could be annoying, but I'm perhaps the only one who noticed
that..

> Same logic as in XLogWrite() and I don't think there is a need for a
> dedicated wait event, so LGTM.

Thanks.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2025-03-05 12:52:40 Re: doc: expand note about pg_upgrade's --jobs option
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2025-03-05 12:19:16 Re: Add regression test checking combinations of (object,backend_type,context) in pg_stat_io