Re: shared-memory based stats collector - v70

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: shared-memory based stats collector - v70
Date: 2022-04-09 19:38:49
Message-ID: CAKFQuwYKqXh4TfXSvP5yNHcUASiE+AN5DUnGU9=XqYC85Es09w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 12:07 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:

>
> > ... specific counters. In particular, replay will not increment
> > pg_stat_database or pg_stat_all_tables columns, and the startup process
> > will not report reads and writes for the pg_statio views.
> >
> > It would helpful to give at least one specific example of what is being
> > recorded normally, especially since we give three of what is not.
>
> The second sentence is a set of examples - or do you mean examples for what
> actions by the startup process are counted?
>
>
Specific views that these statistics will be updating; like
pg_stat_database being the example of a view that is not updating.

David J.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2022-04-09 19:57:48 Is RecoveryConflictInterrupt() entirely safe in a signal handler?
Previous Message Andres Freund 2022-04-09 19:06:55 Re: shared-memory based stats collector - v70