Re: pg_stat_io not tracking smgrwriteback() is confusing - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Melanie Plageman
Subject Re: pg_stat_io not tracking smgrwriteback() is confusing
Date
Msg-id CAAKRu_aKWkUwCVFh-8=e7qiD3LonQv=-n_AZnpA7ZCCuQxLd7A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_stat_io not tracking smgrwriteback() is confusing  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: pg_stat_io not tracking smgrwriteback() is confusing  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 6:13 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
Hi,

On 2023-04-24 17:37:48 -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 02:14:32PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > It starts blocking once "enough" IO is in flight. For things like an immediate
> > checkpoint, that can happen fairly quickly, unless you have a very fast IO
> > subsystem. So often it'll not matter whether we track smgrwriteback(), but
> > when it matter, it can matter a lot.
>
> I see. So, it sounds like this is most likely to happen for checkpointer
> and not likely to happen for other backends who call
> ScheduleBufferTagForWriteback().

It's more likely, but once the IO subsystem is busy, it'll also happen for
other users ScheduleBufferTagForWriteback().


> Also, it seems like this (given the current code) is only reachable for
> permanent relations (i.e. not for IO object temp relation). If other backend
> types than checkpointer may call smgrwriteback(), we likely have to consider
> the IO context.

I think we should take it into account - it'd e.g. interesting to see a COPY
is bottlenecked on smgrwriteback() rather than just writing the data.

With the quick and dirty attached patch and using your example but with a
pgbench -T200 on my rather fast local NVMe SSD, you can still see quite
a difference.
This is with a stats reset before the checkpoint.

unpatched:

    backend_type     |    object     |  context  |  writes | write_time |  fsyncs | fsync_time
---------------------+---------------+-----------+---------+------------+---------+------------
 background writer   | relation      | normal    |     443 |      1.408 |       0 |          0
 checkpointer        | relation      | normal    |  187804 |    396.829 |      47 |    254.226

patched:

    backend_type     |    object     |  context  |  writes |     write_time     | fsyncs | fsync_time
---------------------+---------------+-----------+---------+--------------------+--------+------------
 background writer   | relation      | normal    |     917 | 4.4670000000000005 |      0 |          0
 checkpointer        | relation      | normal    |  375798 |            977.354 |     48 |    202.514

I did compare client backend stats before and after pgbench and it made
basically no difference. I'll do a COPY example like you mentioned.

Patch needs cleanup/comments and a bit more work, but I could do with
a sanity check review on the approach.

- Melanie
Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: could not extend file "base/5/3501" with FileFallocate(): Interrupted system call
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_stat_io not tracking smgrwriteback() is confusing