On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 11:28 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota....@gmail.com> wrote: > > At Thu, 2 Apr 2020 00:41:20 -0500, Justin Pryzby <pry...@telsasoft.com> wrote > in > > On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 10:13:18AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > In thread [1], we are discussing to expose WAL usage data for each > > > statement in a way quite similar to how we expose BufferUsage data. > > > The way it exposes seems reasonable to me and no one else raises any > > > objection. It could be that it appears fine to others who have > > > reviewed the patch but I thought it would be a good idea to write a > > > separate email just for its UI and see if anybody has objection. > > > > +1 > > > > Regarding v10-0004-Add-option-to-report-WAL-usage-in-EXPLAIN-and-au.patch: > > I think there should be additional spaces before "full" and before "bytes": > > > > > WAL: records=2359 full page records=42 bytes=447788 > > > > Compare with these: > > > > "Sort Method: %s %s: %ldkB\n", > > "Buckets: %d (originally %d) Batches: %d (originally %d) Memory > > Usage: %ldkB\n", > > "Buckets: %d Batches: %d Memory Usage: %ldkB\n", > > > > Otherwise "records=2359 full page records=42" is hard to parse. > > I got the same feeling seeing the line. >
But isn't this same as we have BufferUsage data? We can probably display it as full_page_writes or something like that. > "full page records" seems to be showing the number of full page > images, not the record having full page images. > I am not sure what exactly is a difference but it is the records having full page images. Julien correct me if I am wrong. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
