Re: Add wal_fpi_bytes_[un]compressed to pg_stat_wal

From: Shinya Kato <shinya11(dot)kato(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Add wal_fpi_bytes_[un]compressed to pg_stat_wal
Date: 2025-10-28 10:33:00
Message-ID: CAOzEurSiSr+rusd0GzVy8Bt30QwLTK=ugVMnF6=5WhsSrukvvw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 4:32 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> Without the changes in instrument.c from patch 0002, patch 0001 that
> implements the basics would not work. So.. I have moved the changes
> of instrument.c to 0001, reordered the fields to be more consistent,
> did two bumps (catalog, stats file), simplified the docs, then applied
> the result.

Sorry for the inconvenience, and thank you for committing. I have
revised patch 0002, which adds wal_fpi_bytes to EXPLAIN (WAL).

> By the way, Kato-san, what do you think about the attached extra
> simplification? With the FPIs counted in bytes, I don't see much a
> point in passing around the number of FPIs generated from
> XLogRecordAssemble() to XLogInsertRecord() .

I investigated previous discussions and found [0]. This thread
mentioned that XLogInsert() calls XLogRecordAssemble() multiple times
in its do-while loop, so the value might be invalid.

Based on the discussion above, it seems my previous patch also has the
same issue.

[0] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200329121944.GA79261%40nol

--
Best regards,
Shinya Kato
NTT OSS Center

Attachment Content-Type Size
v3-0002-Expose-WAL-FPI-byte-totals-in-EXPLAIN.patch application/octet-stream 2.9 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Jones 2025-10-28 10:46:41 Re: [PATCH] Add pg_get_trigger_ddl() to retrieve the CREATE TRIGGER statement
Previous Message Álvaro Herrera 2025-10-28 10:31:23 Re: Bug in pg_stat_statements