Hi,
On 2023-04-07 12:17:38 -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> Attached v9 addresses review feedback as well as resolving merge
> conflicts with recent relation extension patchset.
I've edited it a bit more:
- removed pgstat_tracks_io_time() and replaced it by returning the new
IO_COL_INVALID =
Attached v9 addresses review feedback as well as resolving merge
conflicts with recent relation extension patchset.
I've changed pgstat_count_io_op_time() to take a count and call
pgstat_count_io_op_n() so it can be used with smgrzeroextend(). I do
wish that the parameter to
Hi,
On 2023-03-31 15:44:58 -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> From 789d4bf1fb749a26523dbcd2c69795916b711c68 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Melanie Plageman
> Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 16:00:55 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH v8 1/4] Count IO time for temp relation writes
>
> Both pgstat_database and
Attached is a rebased version in light of 8aaa04b32d
- Melanie
From 789d4bf1fb749a26523dbcd2c69795916b711c68 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Melanie Plageman
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 16:00:55 -0400
Subject: [PATCH v8 1/4] Count IO time for temp relation writes
Both pgstat_database and
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 10:34 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2023-03-16 17:19:16 -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > > > > I wonder if we should get rid of pgStatBlockReadTime,
> > > > > pgStatBlockWriteTime,
> > > >
> > > > And then have pg_stat_reset_shared('io') reset pg_stat_database
Hi,
On 2023-03-16 17:19:16 -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > > > I wonder if we should get rid of pgStatBlockReadTime,
> > > > pgStatBlockWriteTime,
> > >
> > > And then have pg_stat_reset_shared('io') reset pg_stat_database IO
> > > stats?
> >
> > Yes.
>
> I think this makes sense but I am
v5 attached mostly addresses instr_time persistence issues.
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 6:56 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-03-09 11:50:38 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 1:39 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > On 2023-03-06 11:30:13 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > > > >
Hi,
On 2023-03-09 11:50:38 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 1:39 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2023-03-06 11:30:13 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > > > As pgstat_bktype_io_stats_valid() is called only in Assert(), I think
> > > > that would be a good idea
> > > > to
Hi, v4 attached addresses these review comments.
On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 1:39 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-03-06 11:30:13 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > > As pgstat_bktype_io_stats_valid() is called only in Assert(), I think
> > > that would be a good idea
> > > to also check that if
> >>> Now I've a second thought: what do you think about resetting the related
> >>> number
> >>> of operations and *_time fields when enabling/disabling track_io_timing?
> >>> (And mention it in the doc).
> >>>
> >>> That way it'd prevent bad interpretation (at least as far the time per
> >>>
Hi,
On 3/9/23 1:34 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2023-03-08 12:55:34 +0100, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
On 3/7/23 7:47 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2023-03-07 13:43:28 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
No, I don't think we can do that. It can be enabled on a per-session basis.
Oh right. So it's
Hi,
On 2023-03-08 12:55:34 +0100, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> On 3/7/23 7:47 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2023-03-07 13:43:28 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > > > Now I've a second thought: what do you think about resetting the
> > > > related number
> > > > of operations and *_time fields
Hi,
On 3/7/23 7:47 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2023-03-07 13:43:28 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
Now I've a second thought: what do you think about resetting the related number
of operations and *_time fields when enabling/disabling track_io_timing? (And
mention it in the doc).
That way
On 2023-03-07 13:43:28 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > Now I've a second thought: what do you think about resetting the related
> > number
> > of operations and *_time fields when enabling/disabling track_io_timing?
> > (And mention it in the doc).
> >
> > That way it'd prevent bad
Thanks for taking another look!
On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 10:52 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
> On 3/6/23 5:30 PM, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > Thanks for the review!
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 4:49 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
> > wrote:
> >> On 2/26/23 5:03 PM, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> >>> The
Hi,
On 2023-03-06 11:30:13 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > As pgstat_bktype_io_stats_valid() is called only in Assert(), I think that
> > would be a good idea
> > to also check that if counts are not Zero then times are not Zero.
>
> Yes, I think adding some validation around the
Hi,
On 3/6/23 5:30 PM, Melanie Plageman wrote:
Thanks for the review!
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 4:49 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
On 2/26/23 5:03 PM, Melanie Plageman wrote:
The timings will only be non-zero when track_io_timing is on
That could lead to incorrect interpretation if one wants
Thanks for the review!
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 4:49 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
> On 2/26/23 5:03 PM, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > As suggested in [1], the attached patch adds IO times to pg_stat_io;
>
> Thanks for the patch!
>
> I started to have a look at it and figured out that a tiny rebase
Hi,
On 2/26/23 5:03 PM, Melanie Plageman wrote:
Hi,
As suggested in [1], the attached patch adds IO times to pg_stat_io;
Thanks for the patch!
I started to have a look at it and figured out that a tiny rebase was needed
(due to
728560db7d and b9f0e54bc9), so please find the rebase (aka V2)
19 matches
Mail list logo
