On 2021/05/19 11:40, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Thanks for updating the patch! I modified some comments slightly and
> pushed that version of the patch.
Thanks a lot!
Regards,
--
Masahiro Ikeda
NTT DATA CORPORATION
On 2021/05/18 9:57, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/05/17 22:34, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/05/17 16:39, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
Thanks for your comments!
+ * is executed, wal records aren't nomally generated (although HOT makes
nomally -> normally?
Yes, fixed.
+ * It's not
On 2021/05/17 22:34, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/05/17 16:39, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for your comments!
>>
+ * is executed, wal records aren't nomally generated (although HOT
makes
>>>
>>> nomally -> normally?
>>
>> Yes, fixed.
>>
+ * It's not enough to
On 2021/05/17 16:39, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
Thanks for your comments!
+ * is executed, wal records aren't nomally generated (although HOT makes
nomally -> normally?
Yes, fixed.
+ * It's not enough to check the number of generated wal records, for
+ * example the walwriter m
Thanks for your comments!
>> + * is executed, wal records aren't nomally generated (although HOT makes
>
> nomally -> normally?
Yes, fixed.
>> + * It's not enough to check the number of generated wal records, for
>> + * example the walwriter may write/sync the WAL although it doesn
On 2021-05-13 09:05, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/05/12 19:19, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/05/11 18:46, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/05/11 16:44, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/04/28 9:10, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/04/27 21:56, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/04/26 10:11, Masahiro Iked
On 2021/05/12 19:19, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/05/11 18:46, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2021/05/11 16:44, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2021/04/28 9:10, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/04/27 21:56, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/04/26 10:11, Masahiro
On 2021/05/11 18:46, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/05/11 16:44, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/04/28 9:10, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/04/27 21:56, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/04/26 10:11, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
First patch has only the changes for pg_stat_wal view.
("v6-0001-performa
On 2021/05/11 16:44, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/04/28 9:10, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2021/04/27 21:56, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2021/04/26 10:11, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
First patch has only the changes for pg_stat_wal view.
("v6-0001-performance-improvement
On 2021/04/28 9:10, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
Second one has the changes for the type of the BufferUsage's and WalUsage's
members. I change the type from long to int64. Is it better to make new thread?
("v6-0002-change-the-data-type-of-XXXUsage-from-long-to-int64.patch")
Will review the patch la
On 2021/04/28 9:10, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/04/27 21:56, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/04/26 10:11, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
First patch has only the changes for pg_stat_wal view.
("v6-0001-performance-improvements-of-reporting-wal-stats-without-introducing-a-new-variable.patch")
+
On 2021/04/27 21:56, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/04/26 10:11, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>
>> First patch has only the changes for pg_stat_wal view.
>> ("v6-0001-performance-improvements-of-reporting-wal-stats-without-introducing-a-new-variable.patch")
>>
>
> + pgWalUsage.wal_records
On 2021/04/26 10:11, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/04/23 16:30, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/04/23 10:25, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2021-04-23 09:26:17 +0900, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/04/23 0:36, Andres Freund wrote:
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021, at 06:42, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/04/
On 2021/04/23 16:30, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/04/23 10:25, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2021-04-23 09:26:17 +0900, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>> On 2021/04/23 0:36, Andres Freund wrote:
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021, at 06:42, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On 2021/04/21 18:31, Masahiro Ikeda
On 2021/04/23 10:25, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2021-04-23 09:26:17 +0900, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/04/23 0:36, Andres Freund wrote:
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021, at 06:42, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/04/21 18:31, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
BTW, is it better to change PgStat_Counter from int64 to
Hi,
On 2021-04-23 09:26:17 +0900, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
> On 2021/04/23 0:36, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 22, 2021, at 06:42, Fujii Masao wrote:
> >> On 2021/04/21 18:31, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
> BTW, is it better to change PgStat_Counter from int64 to uint64 because>
> there ar
On 2021/04/23 9:26, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/04/23 0:36, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021, at 06:42, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/04/21 18:31, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
BTW, is it better to change PgStat_Counter from int64 to uint64 because> there
aren't any counters with ne
On 2021/04/23 0:36, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021, at 06:42, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On 2021/04/21 18:31, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
BTW, is it better to change PgStat_Counter from int64 to uint64 because>
there aren't any counters with negative number?
>> On second tho
Hi
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021, at 06:42, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/04/21 18:31, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
> >> BTW, is it better to change PgStat_Counter from int64 to uint64 because>
> >> there aren't any counters with negative number?
>
> On second thought, it's ok even if the counters like wal
On 2021/04/21 18:31, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
BTW, is it better to change PgStat_Counter from int64 to uint64 because> there
aren't any counters with negative number?
On second thought, it's ok even if the counters like wal_records get overflowed.
Because they are always used to calculate the
On 2021/04/21 15:08, torikoshia wrote:
> On 2021-04-16 10:27, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>> On 2021/04/13 9:33, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2021/03/30 20:37, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
OK, I added the condition to the fast-return check. I noticed that I
misunderstood that the purpose is
On 2021-04-16 10:27, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/04/13 9:33, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/03/30 20:37, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
OK, I added the condition to the fast-return check. I noticed that I
misunderstood that the purpose is to avoid expanding a clock check
using WAL
stats counters. But,
On 2021/04/13 9:33, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/03/30 20:37, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>> OK, I added the condition to the fast-return check. I noticed that I
>> misunderstood that the purpose is to avoid expanding a clock check using WAL
>> stats counters. But, the purpose is to make the cond
On 2021/03/30 20:37, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
OK, I added the condition to the fast-return check. I noticed that I
misunderstood that the purpose is to avoid expanding a clock check using WAL
stats counters. But, the purpose is to make the conditions stricter, right?
Yes. Currently if the follo
On 2021/03/30 17:28, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Tue, 30 Mar 2021 09:41:24 +0900, Masahiro Ikeda
> wrote in
>> I update the patch since there were my misunderstanding points.
>>
>> On 2021/03/26 16:20, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>> Thanks for many your suggestions!
>>> I made the patch to handle
At Tue, 30 Mar 2021 09:41:24 +0900, Masahiro Ikeda
wrote in
> I update the patch since there were my misunderstanding points.
>
> On 2021/03/26 16:20, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
> > Thanks for many your suggestions!
> > I made the patch to handle the issues.
> >
> >> 1) What is the motivation to ha
I update the patch since there were my misunderstanding points.
On 2021/03/26 16:20, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
> Thanks for many your suggestions!
> I made the patch to handle the issues.
>
>> 1) What is the motivation to have both prevWalUsage and pgWalUsage,
>>instead of just accumulating the s
At Mon, 29 Mar 2021 11:09:00 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> At Fri, 26 Mar 2021 10:07:45 -0700, Andres Freund wrote
> in
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2021-03-25 16:37:10 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > > On the other hand, the counters are incremented in XLogInsertRecord()
> > > and I t
At Fri, 26 Mar 2021 10:07:45 -0700, Andres Freund wrote in
> Hi,
>
> On 2021-03-25 16:37:10 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > On the other hand, the counters are incremented in XLogInsertRecord()
> > and I think we don't want add instructions there.
>
> I don't really buy this. Setting a bool
Hi,
On 2021-03-25 16:37:10 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> On the other hand, the counters are incremented in XLogInsertRecord()
> and I think we don't want add instructions there.
I don't really buy this. Setting a boolean to true, in a cacheline
you're already touching, isn't that much compar
Thanks for many your suggestions!
I made the patch to handle the issues.
> 1) What is the motivation to have both prevWalUsage and pgWalUsage,
>instead of just accumulating the stats since the last submission?
>There doesn't seem to be any comment explaining it? Computing
>differences
At Fri, 26 Mar 2021 10:32:23 +0900, Fujii Masao
wrote in
> > I may be misunderstanding or missing something, but the only place
> > where pgWalUsage counters are increased is XLogInsertRecrod. That is,
> > pgWalUsage counts wal insertions, not writes nor flushes. AFAICS
>
> Yes. And WalStats
On 2021/03/26 10:08, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
At Thu, 25 Mar 2021 19:01:23 +0900, Fujii Masao
wrote in
On 2021/03/25 16:37, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
pgWalUsage was used without resetting and we (I) thought that that
behavior should be preserved. On second thought, as Andres suggested,
we
At Thu, 25 Mar 2021 19:01:23 +0900, Fujii Masao
wrote in
> On 2021/03/25 16:37, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > pgWalUsage was used without resetting and we (I) thought that that
> > behavior should be preserved. On second thought, as Andres suggested,
> > we can just reset pgWalUsage at sending s
On 2021/03/25 16:37, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
At Wed, 24 Mar 2021 21:07:26 -0700, Andres Freund wrote in
Hi,
On 2021-03-25 10:51:56 +0900, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
On 2021/03/25 8:22, Andres Freund wrote:
1) What is the motivation to have both prevWalUsage and pgWalUsage,
instead of just
At Wed, 24 Mar 2021 21:07:26 -0700, Andres Freund wrote in
> Hi,
>
> On 2021-03-25 10:51:56 +0900, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
> > On 2021/03/25 8:22, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > 1) What is the motivation to have both prevWalUsage and pgWalUsage,
> > >instead of just accumulating the stats since th
Hi,
On 2021-03-25 10:51:56 +0900, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
> On 2021/03/25 8:22, Andres Freund wrote:
> > 1) What is the motivation to have both prevWalUsage and pgWalUsage,
> >instead of just accumulating the stats since the last submission?
> >There doesn't seem to be any comment explaining
On 2021/03/25 8:22, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I got a few questions about the wal stats while working on the shmem
> stats patch:
Thanks for your reviews.
> 1) What is the motivation to have both prevWalUsage and pgWalUsage,
>instead of just accumulating the stats since the last sub
38 matches
Mail list logo
