Hi, On 2014-09-23 10:31:24 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > I suggest we count these things: > > 1. The number of buffers the reclaimer has put back on the free list. > 2. The number of times a backend has run the clocksweep. > 3. The number of buffers past which the reclaimer has advanced the clock > sweep (i.e. the number of buffers it had to examine in order to reclaim the > number counted by #1).
> 4. The number of buffers past which a backend has advanced the clocksweep > (i.e. the number of buffers it had to examine in order to allocate the > number of buffers count by #3). > 5. The number of buffers allocated from the freelist which the backend did > not use because they'd been touched (what you're calling > buffers_touched_freelist). Sounds good. > It's hard to come up with good names for all of these things that are > consistent with the somewhat wonky existing names. Here's an attempt: > > 1. bgreclaim_freelist bgreclaim_alloc_clocksweep? > 2. buffers_alloc_clocksweep (you've got buffers_backend_clocksweep, but I > think we want to make it more parallel with buffers_alloc, which is the > number of buffers allocated, not buffers_backend, the number of buffers > *written* by a backend) > 3. clocksweep_bgreclaim > 4. clocksweep_backend I think bgreclaim/backend should always be either be a prefix or a postfix. But not one in some variables and some in another. > 5. freelist_touched I wonder if we shouldn't move all this to a new view, instead of stuffing it somewhere where it really doesn't belong. pg_stat_buffers or something like it. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
