Thanks for your review.
>> Thanks for the patch. Do we also need to do the change in
>> HandleMainLoopInterrupts, HandleCheckpointerInterrupts,
>> HandlePgArchInterrupts, HandleWalWriterInterrupts as we don't call
>> CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() there?
> Yeah, that's still some information that the user asked for. Looking
> at the things that have a PGPROC entry, should we worry about the main
> loop of the logical replication launcher?
・Now, the target of “pg_log_backend_memory_contexts()” is “autovacuum
launcher” and “logical replication launcher”. I observed that the delay
occurred only in “autovacuum launcher” not in “logical replication
launcher”.
・”autovacuum launcher” used “HandleAutoVacLauncherInterrupts()” ( not
including “ProcessLogMemoryContextInterrupt()” ) instead of
“ProcessInterrupts() ( including “ProcessLogMemoryContextInterrupt()” ).
“ProcessLogMemoryContextInterrupt()” will not be executed until the next
“ProcessInterrupts()” is executed. So, I added
“ProcessLogMemoryContextInterrupt()”.
・”logical replication launcher” uses only “ProcessInterrupts()”. So, We
don’t have to fix it.
> IMHO, we can support all the processes which return a PGPROC entry by
> both BackendPidGetProc and AuxiliaryPidGetProc where the
> AuxiliaryPidGetProc would cover the following processes. I'm not sure
> one is interested in the memory context info of auxiliary processes.
・The purpose of this patch is to solve the delay problem, so I would
like another patch to deal with “ BackendPidGetProc” and
“AuxiliaryPidGetProc”.
Regards,
Koyu Tanigawa
