Re: Track the amount of time waiting due to cost_delay

From: Masahiro Ikeda <ikedamsh(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Track the amount of time waiting due to cost_delay
Date: 2024-12-09 09:21:21
Message-ID: a362b6f17d4bfedf727f91195c3bf00c@oss.nttdata.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2024-12-06 18:31, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 10:43:51AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
>> Yeah, people would likely use this new field to monitor long running
>> vacuum.
>> Long enough that this error should be acceptable. Do you agree?
>
> OTOH, adding the 100% accuracy looks as simple as v9-0002 attached
> (0001 is
> same as for v8), so I think we should provide it.

Thanks! The patch looks good to me.

Regards,
--
Masahiro Ikeda
NTT DATA CORPORATION

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrea Gelmini 2024-12-09 09:47:00 Re: FileFallocate misbehaving on XFS
Previous Message jian he 2024-12-09 08:56:14 Re: [PATCH] Fix jsonb comparison for raw scalar pseudo arrays