| From: | Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik(at)postgres(dot)ai> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Kirk Wolak <wolakk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrey Borodin <amborodin(at)acm(dot)org>, aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Subject: | Missing wait events (gap analysis) |
| Date: | 2025-11-22 00:43:31 |
| Message-ID: | CAM527d9PkaSj-gNjLZqjJXnqaWTD8kHPtm2Yj8-1Gh_0pTRgDA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi hi
Many tools that implement wait event analysis, when visualizing samples
with "wait_event is null" use green color and "CPU" (perhaps, it started
with RDS Performance Insights and PASH Viewer and, I suppose, originally
came from the Oracle world, and now I see it in many more places).
I don't have any concerns with green color, but always had a feeling that
"coalesce(wait_event, 'CPU')" is an assumption that can make analysis
inaccurate, because there may be a lot of places in the code that are not
covered by wait events, but technically should -- and such places cannot be
named "CPU".
I asked Claude Code to analyze Postgres source code and find such places,
that we could potentially cover with more wait events. Here is the first
result:
https://github.com/NikolayS/postgres/blob/claude/cpu-asterisk-wait-events-01CyiYYMMcFMovuqPqLNcp8T/WAIT_EVENTS_ANALYSIS.md
Before moving forward with proposals of specific patches, I wanted to hear
opinions -- does it make sense to work in this direction?
Nik
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chao Li | 2025-11-22 01:31:06 | Re: Allow GUC settings in CREATE SUBSCRIPTION CONNECTION to take effect |
| Previous Message | Jacob Champion | 2025-11-22 00:25:11 | Re: [PATCH] Reorganize pqcomm.h a bit |