| From: | Alena Rybakina <a(dot)rybakina(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <jnasby(at)upgrade(dot)com>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrei Zubkov <zubkov(at)moonset(dot)ru>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru, Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ilia Evdokimov <ilya(dot)evdokimov(at)tantorlabs(dot)com>, Alena Rybakina <lena(dot)ribackina(at)yandex(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: Vacuum statistics |
| Date: | 2025-12-20 23:36:42 |
| Message-ID: | de4bdbff-a86c-4830-82b1-0c14af2b597d@postgrespro.ru |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
I’ve added some changes to one of the approaches and also did additional
cleanup and stabilization work on the vacuum statistics tests. Specifically:
* I moved the vacuum statistics tests into the tests tab and made them
more stable. For slower machines, vacuum is now triggered inside the
statistics wait function. Previously, some backends didn’t have
enough time to release the lock, which could lead to differences
because the vacuum hadn’t fully completed yet.
* I also ran the backend tests and fixed a couple of minor issues
along the way.
* I ran pgindent to clean up and normalize the formatting.
For now, I’ve temporarily removed collecting statistics related to
database-level errors when vacuum is forced to stop. I’m currently stuck
on how to properly expose statistics for cluster-level objects, since
their dbid is 0.
At the moment, only the second test still looks odd, and I haven’t fully
figured out why yet. It seems like aggressive vacuum can no longer be
triggered the same way as before with the current gucs, but I’m still
investigating this.
Best regards,
Alena Rybakina
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v26-0001-Machinery-for-grabbing-an-extended-vacuum-statistics.patch | text/plain | 79.0 KB |
| v26-0002-Machinery-for-grabbing-an-extended-vacuum-statistics.patch | text/plain | 54.6 KB |
| v26-0003-Machinery-for-grabbing-an-extended-vacuum-statistics.patch | text/plain | 22.4 KB |
| v26-0004-Vacuum-statistics-have-been-separated-from-regular.patch | text/plain | 71.3 KB |
| v26-0005-Add-documentation-about-the-system-views-that-are-us.patch | text/plain | 24.5 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2025-12-21 02:08:47 | Re: should we have a fast-path planning for OLTP starjoins? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2025-12-20 22:49:24 | Re: should we have a fast-path planning for OLTP starjoins? |