Re: New statistics for WAL buffer dirty writes

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Satoshi Nagayasu <snaga(at)uptime(dot)jp>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New statistics for WAL buffer dirty writes
Date: 2012-10-23 16:12:53
Message-ID: 20121023161253.GI4971@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Satoshi Nagayasu escribió:

> With this patch, walwriter process and each backend process
> would sum up dirty writes, and send it to the stat collector.
> So, the value could be saved in the stat file, and could be
> kept on restarting.
>
> The statistics could be retreive with using
> pg_stat_get_xlog_dirty_writes() function, and could be reset
> with calling pg_stat_reset_shared('walwriter').
>
> Now, I have one concern.
>
> The reset time could be captured in globalStats.stat_reset_timestamp,
> but this value is the same with the bgwriter one.
>
> So, once pg_stat_reset_shared('walwriter') is called,
> stats_reset column in pg_stat_bgwriter does represent
> the reset time for walwriter, not for bgwriter.
>
> How should we handle this? Should we split this value?
> And should we have new system view for walwriter?

I think the answer to the two last questions is yes. It doesn't seem to
make sense, to me, to have a single reset timings for what are
effectively two separate things.

Please submit an updated patch to next CF. I'm marking this one
returned with feedback. Thanks.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-10-23 16:21:31 Re: too much pgbench init output
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2012-10-23 16:02:13 Re: too much pgbench init output