On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 11:29 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 3:53 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> > I think we should consider deprecating the pg_stat_bgwriter columns but
> > leaving them in place for a few years. New stuff should only be added to
> > pg_stat_checkpointer, but we don't need to break old monitoring queries.
>
> I vote to just remove them. I think that most people won't update
> their queries until they are forced to do so. I don't think it
> matters very much when we force them to do that.
>
> Our track record in following through on deprecations is pretty bad
> too, which is another consideration.
Hm. I'm fine with either way. Even if we remove the checkpointer
columns from pg_stat_bgwriter, the changes that one needs to do are so
minimal and straightforward because the column names aren't changed,
just the view name.
Having said that, I don't have a strong opinion here. I'll leave it to
the other hacker's opinion and/or committer's discretion.
FWIW - here's the v2 patch that gets rid of checkpointer columns from
pg_stat_bgwriter
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACX8jFET1C3bs_edz_8JRcMg5nz8Y7ryjGaCsfnVpAYoVQ%40mail.gmail.com
and here's the v3 patch that deprecates
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACUjEvPQYGJHmH2FrAj1gmvHskNrOeNUr7xnwjtkYVZvEQ%40mail.gmail.com.
--
Bharath Rupireddy
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
