Re: Track the amount of time waiting due to cost_delay

Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>

From: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@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: 2025-02-12T06:19:12Z
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. Add delay time to VACUUM/ANALYZE (VERBOSE) and autovacuum logs.

  2. Add cost-based vacuum delay time to progress views.

  3. Add is_analyze parameter to vacuum_delay_point().

  4. Refresh cost-based delay params more frequently in autovacuum

Hi,

On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 04:42:26PM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> 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.

Thanks! Regarding 0003 I think it's ok to keep it in this thread (and not
create a dedicated one), as it still fits well with $SUBJECT (and the folks 
interested in are probably already part of this thread). Sounds good to you?

Regards,

-- 
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com