Re: Track the amount of time waiting due to cost_delay

From: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Track the amount of time waiting due to cost_delay
Date: 2024-06-11 08:26:23
Message-ID: ZmgKL8zUm3qxbY9V@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 Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 04:07:05PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:

> Thank you for the proposal and the patch. I understand the motivation
> of this patch.

Thanks for looking at it!

> Beside the point Nathan mentioned, I'm slightly worried
> that massive parallel messages could be sent to the leader process
> when the cost_limit value is low.

I see, I can/will do some testing in this area and share the numbers.

>
> FWIW when I want to confirm the vacuum delay effect, I often use the
> information from the DEBUG2 log message in VacuumUpdateCosts()
> function. Exposing these data (per-worker dobalance, cost_lmit,
> cost_delay, active, and failsafe) somewhere in a view might also be
> helpful for users for checking vacuum delay effects.

Do you mean add time_delayed in pg_stat_progress_vacuum and cost_limit + the
other data you mentioned above in another dedicated view?

Regards,

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message shveta malik 2024-06-11 08:35:32 Re: Conflict Detection and Resolution
Previous Message Tender Wang 2024-06-11 08:11:26 Re: Should consider materializing the cheapest inner path in consider_parallel_nestloop()