Hi, On Mon, Dec 01, 2025 at 11:05:19AM +0530, Soumya S Murali wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 10:23:54AM +0530, Soumya S Murali wrote: > > I am still not convinced of the usefulness of those changes to > > pg_stat_checkpointer, but some feedback on the patch: > > According to my understanding, The monitoring systems can already poll > pg_stat_checkpointer at a reasonable frequency but with the checkpoint > duration values exposed, I think it will be easier to compute - the > checkpoint deltas, fluctuations in duration, notice unusualities and > the timing instabilities in WAL-driven checkpoints etc. These may seem > simple but are useful signals that many existing monitoring dashboards > lack today.
How would such a computation look like? Maybe if you give an example, it would be easier to understand how this would make things better/more robust. I mentioned up-thread that one problem would be multiple checkpoints having happened between two monitoring runs, where the monitoring system sees the duration of the last checkpoint, but maybe more than one happened. Should they keep track of the number of overall checkpoints and adjust in that case? To be more general: we don't store the last duration anywhere else (as far as I can see, happy to be prove wrong), why is this essential for checkpoint duration, and not other things? Or to put it another way: why does the patch change it for checkpoint but not all the other places? Michael
