Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_wal_write statistics view - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Haribabu Kommi
<kommi.haribabu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 2:04 AM, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Attached the latest patch and performance report.
>> >
>> While looking into the patch, I realized that a normal backend has to
>> check almost 10 if conditions at worst case inside XLogWrite(6 in
>> am_background_process method, 1 for write, 1 for blocks, 2 for
>> fsyncs), just to decide whether it is a normal backend or not. The
>> count is more for walwriter process. Although I've not done any
>> performance tests, IMHO, it might add further overhead on the
>> XLogWrite Lock.
>>
>> I was thinking whether it is possible to collect all the stats in
>> XLogWrite() irrespective of the type of backend and update the shared
>> counters at once at the end of the function. Thoughts?
>
>
> Thanks for the review.
> Yes, I agree with you that the stats update can be done at the end
> of the function to avoid some overhead. Updated patch is attached.
>
Thanks for the patch.
+ * Check whether the current process is a normal backend or not.
+ * This function checks for the background processes that does
+ * some WAL write activity only and other background processes
+ * are not considered. It considers all the background workers
+ * as WAL write activity workers.
+ *
+ * Returns false - when the current process is a normal backend
+ *        true - when the current process a background process/worker
+ */
+static bool
+am_background_process()
+{
+   /* check whether current process is a background process/worker? */
+   if (!AmBackgroundWriterProcess() ||
+       !AmCheckpointerProcess() ||
+       !AmStartupProcess() ||
+       !IsBackgroundWorker ||
+       !am_walsender ||
+       !am_autovacuum_worker)
+   {
+       return false;
+   }
+
+   return true;
+}
I think you've to do AND operation here instead of OR. Isn't it?
Another point is that, the function description could start with
'Check whether the current process is a background process/worker.'

> There is an overhead with IO time calculation. Is the view is good
> enough without IO columns?
I'm not sure how IO columns are useful for tuning the WAL write/fsync
performance from an user's perspective. But, it's definitely useful
for developing/improving stuffs in XLogWrite.

>
> And also during my tests, I didn't observe any other background
> processes performing the xlogwrite operation, the values are always
> zero. Is it fine to merge them with backend columns?
>
Apart from wal writer process, I don't see any reason why you should
track other background processes separately from normal backends.
However, I may be missing some important point.



-- 
Thanks & Regards,
Kuntal Ghosh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers