From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Subject: | Re: relfilenode statistics |
Date: | 2024-06-06 16:27:49 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmobKpUuVJuesUs=bkJuzMB8aASd_NdmzWpjjBagaFiH5WA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 1:52 AM Bertrand Drouvot
<bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I think we should keep the stats in the relation during relfilenode changes.
> As a POC, v1 implemented a way to do so during TRUNCATE (see the changes in
> table_relation_set_new_filelocator() and in pg_statio_all_tables): as you can
> see in the example provided up-thread the new heap_blks_written statistic has
> been preserved during the TRUNCATE.
Yeah, I think there's something weird about this design. Somehow we're
ending up with both per-relation and per-relfilenode counters:
+ pg_stat_get_blocks_written(C.oid) +
pg_stat_get_relfilenode_blocks_written(d.oid, CASE WHEN
C.reltablespace <> 0 THEN C.reltablespace ELSE d.dattablespace END,
C.relfilenode) AS heap_blks_written,
I'll defer to Andres if he thinks that's awesome, but to me it does
not seem right to track some blocks written in a per-relation counter
and others in a per-relfilenode counter.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2024-06-06 16:30:39 | Re: Reuse child_relids in try_partitionwise_join was Re: Assert failure on bms_equal(child_joinrel->relids, child_joinrelids) |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2024-06-06 16:01:10 | Re: Add new protocol message to change GUCs for usage with future protocol-only GUCs |