Re: More problems with VacuumPageHit style global variables

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Subject: Re: More problems with VacuumPageHit style global variables
Date: 2022-04-21 23:53:08
Message-ID: CAH2-WzkrCeBwKV-sA1Q8VW7Uf8ghuFyynWqF1gfNphZvkAMBBQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 4:28 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> I don't think that there is any risk of one user of either variable
> "clobbering" some other user -- the current values of the variables
> are not actually meaningful at all. They're only useful as a way that
> an arbitrary piece of code instruments an arbitrary operation, by
> making their own copies, running whatever the operation is, and then
> reporting on the deltas. Which makes it even more surprising that this
> was overlooked until now.

I suppose code like pgstat_update_dbstats() would need to copy
pgBufferUsage somewhere if we were to get rid of pgStatBlockReadTime
and pgStatBlockWriteTime. That might not have been acceptable back
when we had the old stats collector; frequent copying of pgBufferUsage
might have non-trivial overhead. The relevant struct (BufferUsage) has
over 10 64-bit integers, versus only 2 for pgStatBlockReadTime and
pgStatBlockWriteTime.

But does that matter anymore now that we have the cumulative stats
system? Doesn't the redundancy seem like a problem?
--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Japin Li 2022-04-22 01:51:03 Re: Replace open mode with PG_BINARY_R/W/A macros
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2022-04-21 23:28:01 Re: More problems with VacuumPageHit style global variables