Re: Log levels for checkpoint/bgwriter monitoring - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Smith
Subject Re: Log levels for checkpoint/bgwriter monitoring
Date
Msg-id Pine.GSO.4.64.0703072313470.25364@westnet.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Log levels for checkpoint/bgwriter monitoring  (ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: Log levels for checkpoint/bgwriter monitoring
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:

> Also, my recommended bgwriter_lru_maxpages is "average number of
> recycled buffers per cycle", that is hardly able to tune manually.

This is completely dependent on what percentage of your buffer cache is 
pinned.  If your load is something like the standard pgbench, the LRU 
writer will rarely find anything useful to write, so this entire line of 
thinking won't work.  The proper behavior for heavily pinned data is to 
turn off the LRU writer altogether so there's more time to run the all 
scan.

The job I'm trying to take on here is not to presume I can solve these 
problems myself yet.  I've instead recognized that people need usefully 
organized information in order to even move in that direction, and that 
informatoin is not even close to being available right now.

What my latest work in progress patches do is summarize each scan of the 
buffer pool with information about how much was written by each of the two 
writers, along with noting what percentage of the pool was pinned data. 
I'm trying to get that one ready to submit this week.  Those three values 
suggest some powerful techniques for tuning, but it's not quite good 
enough to allow auto-tuning.  It also needs a feel for how much time is 
left before the next checkpoint.

What really needs to go along with all this is a sort of progress bar that 
esimates how long we are from a checkpoint based on both a) the timeout, 
and b) how many segments have been written.  The timeout one is easy to 
work with that way (from what I read of your code, you've worked that 
angle).  The part I had trouble doing was getting the WAL writers to 
communicate a progress report on how many segments they filled back to the 
bgwriter.

--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Luke Lonergan"
Date:
Subject: Re: Auto creation of Partitions
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposed ProcessUtility() API additions