Re: RFC: Allow EXPLAIN to Output Page Fault Information

On 2025-04-11 22:18, torikoshia wrote:
> On 2025-03-25 10:27, torikoshia wrote:
>> On 2025-03-22 20:23, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 14:15, torikoshia <torikoshia(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> BTW based on your discussion, I thought this patch could not be
>>>> merged
>>>> anytime soon. Does that align with your understanding?
>>>
>>> Yeah, that aligns with my understanding. I don't think it's realistic
>>> to get this merged before the code freeze, but I think both of the
>>> below issues could be resolved.
>>>
>>>> - With bgworker-based AIO, this patch could mislead users into
>>>> underestimating the actual storage I/O load, which is undesirable.
>>>
>>> To resolve this, I think the patch would need to change to not report
>>> anything if bgworker-based AIO is used.
>>
>> Agreed.
>> I feel the new GUC io_method can be used to determine whether
>> bgworker-based AIO is being used.
>
> I took this approach and when io_method=worker, no additional output
> is shown in the attached patch.

Rebased the patch.

--
Regards,

--
Atsushi Torikoshi
Seconded from NTT DATA GROUP CORPORATION to SRA OSS K.K.