RE: SLRU statistics - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com
Subject RE: SLRU statistics
Date
Msg-id OSAPR01MB50730B73FD983C73DD74CD76FE0D0@OSAPR01MB5073.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SLRU statistics  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: SLRU statistics  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
From: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
> You're right the users can't really take advantage of this - my primary
> motivation was providing a feedback for devs, benchmarking etc. That
> might have been done with DEBUG messages or something, but this seems
> more convenient.

Understood.  I'm in favor of adding performance information even if it doesn't make sense for users (like other DBMSs
sometimesdo.)  One concern is that all the PostgreSQL performance statistics have been useful so far for tuning in some
way,and this may become the first exception.  Do we describe the SLRU stats view in the manual, or hide it only for PG
devsand support staff? 


> I think it's unclear how desirable / necessary it is to allow users to
> tweak those caches. I don't think we should have a GUC for everything,
> but maybe there's some sort of heuristics to determine the size. The
> assumption is we actually find practical workloads where the size of
> these SLRUs is a performance issue.

I understood that the new performance statistics are expected to reveal what SLRUs need to be tunable and/or
implementedwith a different mechanism like shared buffers. 


Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa






pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: error context for vacuum to include block number
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Minor issues in .pgpass