Re: WAL usage calculation patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Julien Rouhaud
Subject Re: WAL usage calculation patch
Date
Msg-id CAOBaU_bmkpRwKHGEKH+-hduPLi=brTB03FSv8R8vc5S4Oc2_UQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WAL usage calculation patch  (Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: WAL usage calculation patch  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 9:37 PM Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 8:17 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Would you like to send a consolidated patch that includes Euler's
> > suggestion and Justin's patch (by making changes for points we
> > discussed.)?  I think we can keep the point related to number of
> > spaces before each field open?
>
> Sure, I'll take care of that tomorrow!

I tried to take into account all that have been discussed, but I have
to admit that I'm absolutely not sure of what was actually decided
here.  I went with those changes:

- rename wal_num_fpw to wal_fpw for consistency, both in pgss view
fiel name but also everywhere in the code
- change comments to consistently mention "full page writes generated"
- changed pgss and explain documentation to mention "full page images
generated", from Justin's patch on another thread
- kept "amount" of WAL bytes
- no change to the explain output as I have no idea what is the
consensus (one or two spaces, use semicolon or equal, show unit or
not)

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: James Coleman
Date:
Subject: execExprInterp() questions / How to improve scalar array op expr eval?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: relcache leak warnings vs. errors