On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 07:14:14AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 12:09:46PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Agreed that something in the lines of non-transaction update of the
>> entries could be adapted in some cases, so +1 for the idea. I suspect
>> that there would be cases where a single stats kind should be able to
>> handle both transactional and non-transactional flush cases.
>> Splitting that across two stats kinds would lead to a lot of
>> duplication.
>
> One option could be to use 2 pending lists for the variables stats and 2 flush
> callbacks for fixed stats. Thoughts?
Hmm. I would have thought first about one pending area, and two
callbacks for the variable-sized stats, called with a different
timing because the stats to be flushed are the same aren't they? For
example, if we are in a long analytical query, we would flush the IO
stats periodically, reset the pending data, repeat/rinse periodically,
and do a last round when we are done with the query in postgres.c.
Do we really need a second callback by the way? It could be as well
the same flush callback, with an option to mark stats kinds that allow
a periodic flush. The trick is knowing where the new reports calls
should happen. The executor is the primary target area.
Or perhaps you think that the pending data of a stats kind could be
different if a kind allows transactional and non-transactional
flushes?
--
Michael
