I am OK with PGSTAT_MIN_INTERVAL. It has been used for flushing other statistics as well. And monitoring systems are generally configured to poll at one-second or longer intervals.
I think that reporting at PGSTAT_MIN_INTERVAL is fine and more than enough. I mean, I 'm not sure that there is a real use case to query the statistics related view at more than a second interval anyway.
I think these two conditions are good too. In a busy system, they are met frequently, so the flush routine will be executed at least once every second. Conversely, when WAL generation is low, there's simply less data to record, and the flush frequency naturally decreases.
Or are you concerned that we may not enter the "When the WAL sender is caught up or has pending data to send" frequently enough?
> Based on my tests, using PGSTAT_MIN_INTERVAL seems to > provide a better balance than PGSTAT_IDLE_INTERVAL.
