Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 6:09 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > On 19/03/2016 01:11, Jim Nasby wrote: >> On 3/3/16 3:54 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: >>> I wonder why there haven't been discussions so far on what kind >>> of information we want by this feature. For example I'd

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 19/03/2016 01:11, Jim Nasby wrote: > On 3/3/16 3:54 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: >> I wonder why there haven't been discussions so far on what kind >> of information we want by this feature. For example I'd be happy >> to see the time of last autovacuum trial and the cause if it has >> been

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 3/3/16 3:54 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: I wonder why there haven't been discussions so far on what kind of information we want by this feature. For example I'd be happy to see the time of last autovacuum trial and the cause if it has been skipped for every table. Such information would

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > On 04/03/2016 23:34, Michael Paquier wrote: >> New design discussions are a little bit late for 9.6 I am afraid :( >> Perhaps we should consider this patch as returned with feedback for >> the time being? The hook

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 04/03/2016 23:34, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 6:52 AM, Julien Rouhaud > wrote: >> Very good suggestion. >> >> I think the most productive way to work on this is to start a wiki page >> to summarize what's the available information, what we should

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 6:52 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > Very good suggestion. > > I think the most productive way to work on this is to start a wiki page > to summarize what's the available information, what we should store and > how to represent it. > > I'll update

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 03/03/2016 10:54, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > Hello, > > At Wed, 2 Mar 2016 17:48:06 -0600, Jim Nasby wrote > in <56d77bb6.6080...@bluetreble.com> >> On 3/2/16 10:48 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: >>> Good point, I don't see a lot of information available with this hooks

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

Hello, At Wed, 2 Mar 2016 17:48:06 -0600, Jim Nasby wrote in <56d77bb6.6080...@bluetreble.com> > On 3/2/16 10:48 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > > Good point, I don't see a lot of information available with this hooks > > that a native system statistics couldn't offer. To

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 3/2/16 10:48 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: Good point, I don't see a lot of information available with this hooks that a native system statistics couldn't offer. To have the same amount of information, I think we'd need a pg_stat_autovacuum view that shows a realtime insight of the workers, and

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 02/03/2016 07:30, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 11:37 PM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: >> I'm not sure what are the fancy things that Michael had in mind with >> exposing the private structure. Michael, was it something like having >> the ability to change some of these data through

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 11:37 PM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > I'm not sure what are the fancy things that Michael had in mind with > exposing the private structure. Michael, was it something like having > the ability to change some of these data through an extension? I was referring to you here :) I

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 3/1/16 3:02 PM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: You mean for database wide vacuum? I mean manual vacuum. Some hooks and stats would apply only to autovac obviously (and it'd be nice to get visibility into the scheduling decisions both daemons are making). But as much as possible things should be

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 01/03/2016 20:29, Jim Nasby wrote: > On 3/1/16 8:37 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: >>> > >>> >We understood (IMHO is an interesting idea) but as Michael said >>> hooks is >>> >for a general purpose. So can you demonstrate other use cases for this >>> >new hooks? >>> > >> I can think of several

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 3/1/16 8:37 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > >We understood (IMHO is an interesting idea) but as Michael said hooks is >for a general purpose. So can you demonstrate other use cases for this >new hooks? > I can think of several usage. First, since the hook will always be called, an extension

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 01/03/2016 13:47, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Julien Rouhaud > > wrote: >> >> On 01/03/2016 07:50, Michael Paquier wrote: >> > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Julien Rouhaud >> >

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > > On 01/03/2016 07:50, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Julien Rouhaud > > wrote: > >> On 29/02/2016 20:20, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: > >>> > >>> On Mon,

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 01/03/2016 07:50, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Julien Rouhaud > wrote: >> On 29/02/2016 20:20, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Julien Rouhaud >>>

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > On 29/02/2016 20:20, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Julien Rouhaud >> > wrote: >>> >>> On 04/06/2015 22:10,

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 29/02/2016 20:20, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Julien Rouhaud > > wrote: >> >> On 04/06/2015 22:10, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: >> > 2015-01-05 17:44 GMT+01:00 Guillaume Lelarge

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > > On 04/06/2015 22:10, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > > 2015-01-05 17:44 GMT+01:00 Guillaume Lelarge > >: > > > > 2015-01-05 17:40 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 04/06/2015 22:10, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > 2015-01-05 17:44 GMT+01:00 Guillaume Lelarge >: > > 2015-01-05 17:40 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas >: > > On Wed, Dec 31, 2014

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

2015-01-05 17:44 GMT+01:00 Guillaume Lelarge guilla...@lelarge.info: 2015-01-05 17:40 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com: On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I'd be all right with putting the data structure declarations in a file named something

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I'd be all right with putting the data structure declarations in a file named something like autovacuum_private.h, especially if it carried an annotation that if you depend on this, don't be surprised if we break your code in

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

2015-01-05 17:40 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com: On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I'd be all right with putting the data structure declarations in a file named something like autovacuum_private.h, especially if it carried an annotation that

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On 1/1/15, 4:17 PM, Noah Misch wrote: I'd be all right with putting the data structure declarations in a file named something like autovacuum_private.h, especially if it carried an annotation that if you depend on this, don't be surprised if we break your code in future. Such an annotation

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Either one of those approaches would cripple our freedom to change those data structures; which we've done repeatedly in the past and will surely want to do again. So I'm pretty much -1 on exposing them. We could instead add

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Either one of those approaches would cripple our freedom to change those data structures; which we've done repeatedly in the past and will surely want to do again. So I'm pretty much

[HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

Hey, There are times where I would need more informations on the autovacuum processes. I'd love to know what each worker is currently doing. I can get something like this from the pg_stat_activity view but it doesn't give me as much informations as the WorkerInfoData struct. I'd also love to

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

Guillaume Lelarge guilla...@lelarge.info writes: All in all, I want to get informations that are typically stored in shared memory, handled by the autovacuum launcher and autovacuum workers. I first thought I could get that by writing some C functions embedded in an extension. But it doesn't

Re: [HACKERS] Publish autovacuum informations

2014-12-29 17:03 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us: Guillaume Lelarge guilla...@lelarge.info writes: All in all, I want to get informations that are typically stored in shared memory, handled by the autovacuum launcher and autovacuum workers. I first thought I could get that by