| From: | Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: log_checkpoints: count WAL segment creations from all processes |
| Date: | 2026-03-24 14:01:18 |
| Message-ID: | SY7PR01MB1092144EEC58DBDC5C306E972B648A@SY7PR01MB10921.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, Xuneng
On Tue, 24 Mar 2026 at 19:17, Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi Zsolt,
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 1:55 PM Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> This is a simple patch, but shouldn't it include at least some basic
> tests verifying the new behavior?
>
> Thanks for looking into this. I've added a test for it. Please take a look.
Thanks for updating the patch. A few comments on v2:
1.
+ (The probes listed next fire in sequence during checkpoint processing.)
+ arg0 is the number of buffers written. arg1 is the total number of
These changes seem unnecessary. Additionally, there appears to be an
indentation issue.
2.
+ current = pg_atomic_read_u64(&XLogCtl->walSegmentsCreated);
+ CheckpointStats.ckpt_segs_added = (int)
+ (current - XLogCtl->walSegsCreatedLastCheckpoint);
+ XLogCtl->walSegsCreatedLastCheckpoint = current;
Is integer overflow a concern here? It seems unlikely in practice.
>
> --
> Best,
> Xuneng
>
> [4. text/x-diff; v2-0001-Count-WAL-segment-creations-by-all-processes-in-l.patch]...
--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Geier | 2026-03-24 14:09:15 | Re: Add pg_stat_vfdcache view for VFD cache statistics |
| Previous Message | Yugo Nagata | 2026-03-24 14:01:10 | Re: Allow to collect statistics on virtual generated columns |