RE: New statistics for tuning WAL buffer size

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
> > I changed the view name from pg_stat_walwrites to pg_stat_walwriter.
> > I think it is better to match naming scheme with other views like
> pg_stat_bgwriter,
> > which is for bgwriter statistics but it has the statistics related to backend.
>
> I prefer the view name pg_stat_walwriter for the consistency with
> other view names. But we also have pg_stat_wal_receiver. Which
> makes me think that maybe pg_stat_wal_writer is better for
> the consistency. Thought? IMO either of them works for me.
> I'd like to hear more opinons about this.

I think pg_stat_bgwriter is now a misnomer, because it contains the backends' activity. Likewise, pg_stat_walwriter leads to misunderstanding because its information is not limited to WAL writer.

How about simply pg_stat_wal? In the future, we may want to include WAL reads in this view, e.g. reading undo logs in zheap.

Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa