Hi,
On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 04:04:53PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 04:59:54AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > Please find attached v6, a mandatory rebase due to catversion bump conflict.
> > I'm removing the catversion bump from the patch as it generates too frequent
> > conflicts (just mention it needs to be done in the commit message).
>
> v6 looks generally reasonable to me.
Thanks for looking at it!
> I think the
> nap_time_since_last_report variable needs to be marked static, though.
Agree.
> One thing that occurs to me is that this information may not be
> particularly useful when parallel workers are used. Without parallelism,
> it's easy enough to figure out the percentage of time that your VACUUM is
> spending asleep, but when there are parallel workers, it may be hard to
> deduce much of anything from the value.
I think that if the number of parallel workers being used are the same across
runs then one can measure "accurately" the impact of some changes (set
vacuum_cost_delay=... for example) on the delay. Without the patch one could just
guess as many others factors could impact the vacuum duration (load on the system,
i/o latency,...).
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
