| From: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | ikedamsh(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com |
| Cc: | masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com, magnus(at)hagander(dot)net |
| Subject: | Re: New statistics for tuning WAL buffer size |
| Date: | 2020-09-11 03:17:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20200911.121716.1852885397303490857.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello.
At Wed, 09 Sep 2020 13:57:37 +0900, Masahiro Ikeda <ikedamsh(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> wrote in
> I checked what function calls XLogBackgroundFlush() which calls
> AdvanceXLInsertBuffer() to increment m_wal_buffers_full.
>
> I found that WalSndWaitForWal() calls it, so I added it.
> Is it better to move it in WalSndLoop() like the attached patch?
By the way, we are counting some wal-related numbers in
pgWalUsage.(bytes, records, fpi). Since now that we are going to have
a new view related to WAL statistics, wouln't it be more useful to
show them together in the view?
(Another reason to propose this is that a substantially one-column
table may look not-great..)
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2020-09-11 04:48:49 | Re: New statistics for tuning WAL buffer size |
| Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2020-09-11 02:58:24 | Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 |