Re: Track the amount of time waiting due to cost_delay
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
Cc: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>, Masahiro Ikeda <ikedamsh@oss.nttdata.com>, "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih@amazon.com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Date: 2025-02-11T22:42:26Z
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 →
-
Add delay time to VACUUM/ANALYZE (VERBOSE) and autovacuum logs.
- 7720082ae532 18.0 landed
-
Add cost-based vacuum delay time to progress views.
- bb8dff9995f2 18.0 landed
-
Add is_analyze parameter to vacuum_delay_point().
- e5b0b0ce1509 18.0 landed
-
Refresh cost-based delay params more frequently in autovacuum
- 7d71d3dd080b 16.0 cited
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 08:51:15AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 02:52:46PM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote: >> Off-list, I've asked Bertrand to gauge the feasibility of adding this >> information to the autovacuum logs and to VACUUM/ANALYZE (VERBOSE). IMHO >> those are natural places to surface this information, and I want to ensure >> that we're not painting ourselves into a corner with the approach we're >> using for the progress views. > > Yeah, I looked at it and that looks as simmple as 0003 attached (as that's the > leader that is doing the report in case of parallel workers being used). > > 0001 and 0002 remain unchanged. Thanks. I've committed 0001 and 0002. -- nathan