Thread

  1. Re: contrib/pg_stat_tcpinfo

    Jakub Wartak <jakub.wartak@enterprisedb.com> — 2025-11-10T08:34:58Z

    On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 1:18 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
    
    Hi Andres!
    
    >> But maybe it's very useful in practice, don't know.
    
    > FWIW, I've needed this many times. Without the TCP information it's very hard
    > to figure out why higher latency connections aren't keeping up - is it packet
    > loss, it it too small network buffers on the sending/receiving side, is it the
    > remote side not keeping up on the CPU level...
    
    Pretty much the same!
    
    > > I don't follow? Why do you want to format data the way "ss" does?
    >
    > Yea, I don't get that either - IMO ss's format is just about the worst
    > possible format. It's very hard to parse and doesn't seem to have advantages
    > making up for that.
    
    Well yes, I've probably used the wrong expression there ("format as
    the ss does"). Technically `ss` might return multiple lines and lacks
    extraction of specific hosts/ports (well one can use filters, but...),
    but here we have normal fields like src/dst/srcport/dstport + we can
    apply WHERE on extracted JSON columns (->). I think it's way better in
    pg_stat_tcpinfo even today than in ss, but I could adapt further based
    on some feedback. E.g. rather than appending Vegas/BBR info like `ss`
    does, we could put nested structure, just like I've did with "skmem",
    so technically it's the same data as in ss, but format would not be
    exactly the same, but use similar-looking names, so that someone
    familiar with `ss` would know how to use it.
    
    Still , it is still PoC, and I'm not sure if the community is open to
    accept (or reject it).
    
    -J.