Re: WAL usage calculation patch

Euler Taveira <euler.taveira@2ndquadrant.com>

From: Euler Taveira <euler.taveira@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@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: 2020-04-06T13:12:55Z
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. Change the display of WAL usage statistics in Explain.

  2. Cosmetic fixups for WAL usage work.

  3. Allow parallel create index to accumulate buffer usage stats.

  4. Allow autovacuum to log WAL usage statistics.

  5. Add the option to report WAL usage in EXPLAIN and auto_explain.

  6. Allow pg_stat_statements to track WAL usage statistics.

  7. Add infrastructure to track WAL usage.

  8. Include information on buffer usage during planning phase, in EXPLAIN output, take two.

  9. Include information on buffer usage during planning phase, in EXPLAIN output.

  10. Allow parallel vacuum to accumulate buffer usage.

  11. Allow pg_stat_statements to track planning statistics.

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.


Regards,


-- 
Euler Taveira                 http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services