Re: relfilenode statistics - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kirill Reshke
Subject Re: relfilenode statistics
Date
Msg-id CALdSSPhQyvK_wsvV+HiQcC6f57Zg2WO60wxv=CXbcoZ1p5HHEQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: relfilenode statistics  (Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: relfilenode statistics
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 at 11:06, Bertrand Drouvot
<bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Does it sound ok to you to move with the above principal? (I'm +1 on it).
>

Hi! I looked through this thread.
Looks like we are still awaiting a patch which stores more counters
(n_dead_tup, ... etc) into relfilenode stats. So, I assume this should
be moved to the next CF.

I also have a very stupid question:
If we don’t have the relation OID when writing buffers out, can we
just store oid to buffertag mapping somewhere and use it?
I suspect that this is a horrible idea, but what's the exact reason?
Is it that we will break too many abstraction layers for such a minor
matter?

--
Best regards,
Kirill Reshke



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: Отв.: Re: UUID v7
Next
From: Andrei Lepikhov
Date:
Subject: Re: Remove useless GROUP BY columns considering unique index