Horton

Re: Vacuum statistics

Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru>

View thread
From: Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Jim Nasby <jnasby@upgrade.com>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>, Ilia Evdokimov <ilya.evdokimov@tantorlabs.com>, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com>, Andrei Zubkov <zubkov@moonset.ru>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>, a.lepikhov@postgrespro.ru, Sami Imseih <samimseih@gmail.com>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>
Date: 2025-06-02T16:50:42Z
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 →

  1. Move wal_buffers_full from PgStat_PendingWalStats to WalUsage

On 02.06.2025 19:25, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 12:49 PM Alena Rybakina
> <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>> On 12.05.2025 08:30, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 5:34 PM Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>>>> I did a rebase and finished the part with storing statistics separately from the relation statistics - now it is possible to disable the collection of statistics for relationsh using gucs and
>>>> this allows us to solve the problem with the memory consumed.
>>>>
>>> I think this patch is trying to collect data similar to what we do for
>>> pg_stat_statements for SQL statements. So, can't we follow a similar
>>> idea such that these additional statistics will be collected once some
>>> external module like pg_stat_statements is enabled? That module should
>>> be responsible for accumulating and resetting the data, so we won't
>>> have this memory consumption issue.
>> The idea is good, it will require one hook for the pgstat_report_vacuum
>> function, the extvac_stats_start and extvac_stats_end functions can be
>> run if the extension is loaded, so as not to add more hooks.
> +1
> Nice idea of a hook.  Given the volume of the patch, it might be a
> good idea to keep this as an extension.
Okay, I'll realize it and apply the patch)
>
>> But I see a problem here with tracking deleted objects for which
>> statistics are no longer needed. There are two solutions to this and I
>> don't like both of them, to be honest.
>> The first way is to add a background process that will go through the
>> table with saved statistics and check whether the relation or the
>> database are relevant now or not and if not, then
>> delete the vacuum statistics information for it. This may be
>> resource-intensive. The second way is to add hooks for deleting the
>> database and relationships (functions dropdb, index_drop,
>> heap_drop_with_catalog).
> Can we workaround this with object_access_hook?

I think this could fix the problem. For the OAT-DROP access type, we can 
call a function to reset the vacuum statistics for relations that are 
about to be dropped.

At the moment, I don’t see any limitations to using this approach.

-- 
Regards,
Alena Rybakina
Postgres Professional