Re: inpricise checkpoint stats

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: inpricise checkpoint stats
Date: 2006-03-23 04:50:00
Message-ID: 2923.1143089400@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

"Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> writes:
> The problematic line is "0 written" --

What's your point? Those stats are correct for the current process (or
if not, better take it up with your kernel vendor) and we've never
stated that they are anything else than process-local stats. In every
version of Postgres it's been possible that pages dirtied by one process
are actually written by some other process --- the bgwriter isn't doing
anything except altering the probabilities a bit.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Qingqing Zhou 2006-03-23 05:37:41 Re: inpricise checkpoint stats
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-03-23 04:27:11 Re: [SQL] Function Parameters in GROUP BY clause cause errors