On Nov 2, 2024, at 7:22 AM, Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
The second is the interrupts field. It is needed for monitoring to know
do we have them or not, so tracking them on the database level will do
the trick. Interrupt is quite rare event, so once the monitoring system
will catch one the DBA can go to the server log for the details.
Just to confirm… by “interrupt” you mean vacuum encountered an error?
Yes it is.
In that case I feel rather strongly that we should label that as “errors”. “Interrupt” could mean a few different things, but “error” is very clear.
I updated patches. I excluded system and user time statistics and save number of interrupts only for database. I removed the ability to get statistics for all tables, now they can only be obtained for an oid table [0], as suggested here. I also renamed the statistics from pg_stat_vacuum_tables to pg_stat_get_vacuum_tables and similarly for indexes and databases. I noticed that that’s what they’re mostly called. Ready for discussion.
I think it’s better that the views follow the existing naming conventions (which don’t include “_get_”; only the functions have that in their names). Assuming that, the only question becomes pg_stat_vacuum_* vs pg_stat_*_vacuum. Given the existing precedent of pg_statio_*, I’m inclined to go with pg_stat_vacuum_*.
