Re: Report bytes and transactions actually sent downtream

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Report bytes and transactions actually sent downtream
Date: 2026-03-14 10:01:42
Message-ID: CAA4eK1L5DE_hqYQK+2RPk86HtLjbtVUiJvobUsDF8panQ4oQEg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 7:39 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 06:13:33PM +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > Could you please share your thoughts on this? Your inputs would help
> > us determine the next steps - whether we should proceed with renaming,
> > and if so, what names you would suggest, or whether we should leave
> > things as they are.
>
> FWIW, I still find the use of _wal_ in these fields rather confusing,
> and they add more inconsistencies with the internal structures of
> reorderbuffer.c. The goal is to add a field to track the number of
> bytes sent downstream. Hence, I would suggest to give up on the
> rename, add the new field, perhaps consider improving the docs for the
> existing fields to tell to which context these numbers refer to, then
> call it a day.
>

+1.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Etsuro Fujita 2026-03-14 11:40:52 Re: Import Statistics in postgres_fdw before resorting to sampling.
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2026-03-14 09:56:39 Re: Streamify more code paths