Re: Per backend relation statistics tracking

From: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Per backend relation statistics tracking
Date: 2025-08-27 13:57:13
Message-ID: aK8OuVPmmDTc9CFX@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 04:55:09PM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote:
> I worry that a single view will grow very wide, and we will have to eventually
> split it. So we may as well start thinking about having multiple views
> in advance.

I gave it more thoughts and I now think that multiple views is better. We
could start with pg_stat_backend_relations here.

> > Having said that, we could imagine adding
> > pg_stat_get_backend_wal() output to pg_stat_backend too.
>
> For this one, I think we should just overload the function
> pg_stat_get_backend_wal,
> and if a PID is not passed in, return all of them; and just create a
> new view called
> pg_stat_backend_wal that returns all the PIDs. sort of like how we have
> pg_stat_get_activity and pg_stat_activity, etc.

Yes, and it's also how the new view is designed in this patch. I think I'll
add a new pg_stat_backend_wal view if the current proposal goes in (for
consistency).

Regards,

--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2025-08-27 14:03:08 Re: Buffer locking is special (hints, checksums, AIO writes)
Previous Message Dean Rasheed 2025-08-27 13:44:55 Re: Inconsistent update in the MERGE command