Re: shared-memory based stats collector

Hi,

On 2019-01-01 18:39:12 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 11/29/18 1:18 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On 2018-Nov-28, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >
> >>> v10-0004-Shared-memory-based-stats-collector.patch
> >>> updated not to touch guc.
> >>> v10-0005-Remove-the-GUC-stats_temp_directory.patch
> >>> collected all guc-related changes.
> >>> updated not to break other programs.
> >>> v10-0006-Split-out-backend-status-monitor-part-from-pgstat.patch
> >>> basebackup.c requires both bestats.h and pgstat.h
> >>> v10-0007-Documentation-update.patch
> >>> small change related to 0005.
> >>
> >> I need to do a more thorough review of part 0006, but these patches
> >> seems quite fine to me. I'd however merge 0007 into the other relevant
> >> parts (it seems like a mix of docs changes for 0004, 0005 and 0006).
> >
> > Looking at 0001 - 0003 it seems OK to keep each as separate commits, but
> > I suggest to have 0004+0006 be a single commit, mostly because
> > introducing a bunch of "new" code in 0004 and then moving it over to
> > bestatus.c in 0006 makes "git blame" doubly painful. And I think
> > committing 0005 and not 0007 makes the documentation temporarily buggy,
> > so I see no reason to think of this as two commits, one being 0004+0006
> > and the other 0005+0007. And even those could conceivably be pushed
> > together instead of as a single patch. (But be sure to push very early
> > in your work day, to have plenty of time to deal with any resulting
> > buildfarm problems.)
> >
>
> Kyotaro-san, do you agree with committing the patch the way Alvaro
> proposed? That is, 0001-0003 as separate commits, and 0004+0006 and
> 0005+0007 together. The plan seems reasonable to me.

Do you guys think these patches are ready already? I'm a bit doubtful, and
failures here could have quite wide-ranging symptoms.

Greetings,

Andres Freund