Re: WAL usage calculation patch
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
From: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
To: Euler Taveira <euler.taveira@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>, Kirill Bychik <kirill.bychik@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Date: 2020-04-06T13:37:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Change the display of WAL usage statistics in Explain.
- 69bfaf2e1de4 13.0 landed
-
Cosmetic fixups for WAL usage work.
- ef08ca113fe3 13.0 landed
-
Allow parallel create index to accumulate buffer usage stats.
- 5c71362174eb 13.0 landed
- f179e9f01b65 11.8 landed
- 13823ad3b012 12.3 landed
-
Allow autovacuum to log WAL usage statistics.
- b7ce6de93b59 13.0 landed
-
Add the option to report WAL usage in EXPLAIN and auto_explain.
- 33e05f89c53e 13.0 landed
-
Allow pg_stat_statements to track WAL usage statistics.
- 6b466bf5f2be 13.0 landed
-
Add infrastructure to track WAL usage.
- df3b181499b4 13.0 landed
-
Include information on buffer usage during planning phase, in EXPLAIN output, take two.
- ce77abe63cfc 13.0 cited
-
Include information on buffer usage during planning phase, in EXPLAIN output.
- ed7a5095716e 13.0 cited
-
Allow parallel vacuum to accumulate buffer usage.
- 3a5e22138a8d 13.0 landed
-
Allow pg_stat_statements to track planning statistics.
- 17e03282241c 13.0 cited
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 10:12:55AM -0300, Euler Taveira wrote: > On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 at 00:25, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I have pushed pg_stat_statements and Explain related patches. I am > > now looking into (auto)vacuum patch and have few comments. > > > > I wasn't paying much attention to this thread. May I suggest changing > wal_num_fpw to wal_fpw? wal_records and wal_bytes does not have a prefix > 'num'. It seems inconsistent to me. > If we want to be consistent shouldn't we rename it to wal_fpws? FTR I don't like much either version.