Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Melanie Plageman
Subject Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)
Date
Msg-id CAAKRu_boF3Yh_PeHs10S-88J3fy3AGCQxHCur6+7tgy78YxJ_g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
Responses Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
v13 (attached) contains several cosmetic updates and the full rename
(comments included) of BufferAccessType and BufferType.

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 7:15 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
>
> Can you say more about 0001?
>

The rationale for this patch was that it doesn't save much to avoid
initializing backend activity state in the bootstrap process and by
doing so, I don't have to do the check if (beentry) in pgstat_inc_ioop()
--which happens on most buffer accesses.

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ranier Vilela
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix uninitialized variable access (src/backend/utils/mmgr/freepage.c)
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: PATH manipulation in 001_libpq_pipeline.pl fails on windows