Re: pg_stat_statements issue with parallel maintenance (Was Re: WAL usage calculation patch)

From: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements issue with parallel maintenance (Was Re: WAL usage calculation patch)
Date: 2020-04-08 06:23:00
Message-ID: CA+fd4k5XqiNrObftwrWxn-=KUYsx6evfH9fZwQO3tOXMiBth-Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 14:44, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 5:17 PM Masahiko Sawada
> <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 18:29, Masahiko Sawada
> > <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 17:42, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:30 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > > > <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Buffer usage statistics seem correct. The small differences would be
> > > > > catalog lookups Peter mentioned.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Agreed, but can you check which part of code does that lookup? I want
> > > > to see if we can avoid that from buffer usage stats or at least write
> > > > a comment about it, otherwise, we might have to face this question
> > > > again and again.
> > >
> > > Okay, I'll check it.
> > >
> >
> > I've checked the buffer usage differences when parallel btree index creation.
> >
> > TL;DR;
> >
> > During tuple sorting individual parallel workers read blocks of
> > pg_amproc and pg_amproc_fam_proc_index to get the sort support
> > function. The call flow is like:
> >
> > ParallelWorkerMain()
> > _bt_parallel_scan_and_sort()
> > tuplesort_begin_index_btree()
> > PrepareSortSupportFromIndexRel()
> > FinishSortSupportFunction()
> > get_opfamily_proc()
> >
>
> Thanks for the investigation. I don't see we can do anything special
> about this. In an ideal world, this should be done once and not for
> each worker but I guess it doesn't matter too much. I am not sure if
> it is worth adding a comment for this, what do you think?
>

I agree with you. If the differences were considerably large probably
we would do something but I think we don't need to anything at this
time.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2020-04-08 06:29:59 Re: 2pc leaks fds
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2020-04-08 06:16:17 Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2