Re: log_checkpoint's "WAL file(s) added" is misleading to the point of uselessness

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: log_checkpoint's "WAL file(s) added" is misleading to the point of uselessness
Date: 2021-07-27 00:50:59
Message-ID: 20210727005059.ugv6dkzaqyvv3bvy@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2021-07-25 12:10:07 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> It's also worth showing them in monitoring stats view like pg_stat_wal?

I'm not convinced that's all that meaningful. It makes sense to include
it as part of the checkpoint output, because checkpoints determine when
WAL can be recycled etc. It's not that clear to me how to represent that
as part of pg_stat_wal?

I guess we could add columns for the amount of WAL has been a) newly
created b) recycled c) removed. In combination that *does* seem
useful. But also a mostly independent change...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com 2021-07-27 00:51:41 RE: row filtering for logical replication
Previous Message Andres Freund 2021-07-27 00:48:00 Re: log_checkpoint's "WAL file(s) added" is misleading to the point of uselessness