Re: log_checkpoint's "WAL file(s) added" is misleading to the point of uselessness - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fujii Masao
Subject Re: log_checkpoint's "WAL file(s) added" is misleading to the point of uselessness
Date
Msg-id 4822e6b7-834d-ff99-a2ae-f0ff7434a8c4@oss.nttdata.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: log_checkpoint's "WAL file(s) added" is misleading to the point of uselessness  ("Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>)
Responses Re: log_checkpoint's "WAL file(s) added" is misleading to the point of uselessness  ("Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>)
List pgsql-hackers

On 2021/07/27 5:27, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> +1.  I was confused by this when working on a WAL pre-allocation
> patch [0].  Perhaps it could be replaced by a new parameter and a new
> field in pg_stat_wal.  How about something like log_wal_init_interval,
> where the value is the minimum amount of time between reporting the
> number of WAL segments created since the last report?

You mean to introduce new GUC like log_wal_init_interval and that
the number of WAL files created since the last report will be logged
every that interval? But isn't it better and simpler to just expose
the accumulated number of WAL files created, in pg_stat_wal view
or elsewhere? If so, we can easily get to know the number of WAL files
created in every interval by checking the view and calculating the diff.

Regards,


-- 
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Some code cleanup for pgbench and pg_verifybackup
Next
From: Tatsuro Yamada
Date:
Subject: Re: list of extended statistics on psql (\dX)