Re: SLRU statistics - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Subject | Re: SLRU statistics |
Date | |
Msg-id | 20200229205518.xrxo535zgd7cl6no@development Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: SLRU statistics (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Responses |
Re: SLRU statistics
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 11:44:26AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >On 2020-Feb-29, Tomas Vondra wrote: > >> Did we actually remove track-enabling GUCs? I think we still have >> >> - track_activities >> - track_counts >> - track_io_timing >> - track_functions >> >> But maybe I'm missing something? > >Hm I remembered we removed the one for row-level stats >(track_row_stats), but what we really did is merge it with block-level >stats (track_block_stats) into track_counts -- commit 48f7e6439568. >Funnily enough, if you disable that autovacuum won't work, so I'm not >sure it's a very useful tunable. And it definitely has more overhead >than what this new GUC would have. > OK >> > I find SlruType pretty odd, and the accompanying "if" list in >> > pg_stat_get_slru() correspondingly so. Would it be possible to have >> > each SLRU enumerate itself somehow? Maybe add the name in SlruCtlData >> > and query that, somehow. (I don't think we have an array of SlruCtlData >> > anywhere though, so this might be a useless idea.) >> >> Well, maybe. We could have a system to register SLRUs dynamically, but >> the trick here is that by having a fixed predefined number of SLRUs >> simplifies serialization in pgstat.c and so on. I don't think the "if" >> branches in pg_stat_get_slru() are particularly ugly, but maybe we could >> replace the enum with a registry of structs, something like rmgrlist.h. >> It seems like an overkill to me, though. > >Yeah, maybe we don't have to fix that now. > IMO the current solution is sufficient for the purpose. I guess we could just stick a name into the SlruCtlData (and remove SlruType entirely), and use that to identify the stats entries. That might be enough, and in fact we already have that - SimpleLruInit gets a name parameter and copies that to the lwlock_tranche_name. One of the main reasons why I opted to use the enum is that it makes tracking, lookup and serialization pretty trivial - it's just an index lookup, etc. But maybe it wouldn't be much more complex with the name, considering the name length is limited by SLRU_MAX_NAME_LENGTH. And we probably don't expect many entries, so we could keep them in a simple list, or maybe a simplehash. I'm not sure what to do with data for SLRUs that might have disappeared after a restart (e.g. because someone removed an extension). Until now those would be in the all in the "other" entry. The attached v2 fixes the issues in your first message: - I moved the page_miss() call after SlruRecentlyUsed(), but then I realized it's entirely duplicate with the page_read() update done in SlruPhysicalReadPage(). I removed the call from SlruPhysicalReadPage() and renamed page_miss to page_read - that's more consistent with shared buffers stats, which also have buffers_hit and buffer_read. - I've also implemented the reset. I ended up adding a new option to pg_stat_reset_shared, which always resets all SLRU entries. We track the reset timestamp for each SLRU entry, but the value is always the same. I admit this is a bit weird - I did it like this because (a) I'm not sure how to identify the individual entries and (b) the SLRU is shared, so pg_stat_reset_shared seems kinda natural. regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Attachment
pgsql-hackers by date: