Re: About to add WAL write/fsync statistics to pg_stat_wal view - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On 2021-02-08 14:26, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On 2021/02/08 13:01, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 2021/02/05 8:45, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>> I pgindented the patches.
>> 
>> Thanks for updating the patches!
>> 
>> +       <function>XLogWrite</function>, which nomally called by an
>> +       <function>issue_xlog_fsync</function>, which nomally called by 
>> an
>> 
>> Typo: "nomally" should be "normally"?
>> 
>> +       <function>XLogFlush</function> request(see <xref 
>> linkend="wal-configuration"/>)
>> +       <function>XLogFlush</function> request(see <xref 
>> linkend="wal-configuration"/>),
>> 
>> Isn't it better to add a space character just after "request"?
>> 
>> +                    INSTR_TIME_SET_CURRENT(duration);
>> +                    INSTR_TIME_SUBTRACT(duration, start);
>> +                    WalStats.m_wal_write_time = 
>> INSTR_TIME_GET_MICROSEC(duration);
>> 
>> If several cycles happen in the do-while loop, m_wal_write_time should 
>> be
>> updated with the sum of "duration" in those cycles instead of 
>> "duration"
>> in the last cycle? If yes, "+=" should be used instead of "=" when 
>> updating
>> m_wal_write_time?
>> 
>> +            INSTR_TIME_SET_CURRENT(duration);
>> +            INSTR_TIME_SUBTRACT(duration, start);
>> +            WalStats.m_wal_sync_time = 
>> INSTR_TIME_GET_MICROSEC(duration);
>> 
>> Also "=" should be "+=" in the above?
> 
> +        /* Send WAL statistics */
> +        pgstat_send_wal();
> 
> This may cause overhead in WAL-writing by walwriter because it's called
> every cycles even when walwriter needs to write more WAL next cycle
> (don't need to sleep on WaitLatch)? If this is right, pgstat_send_wal()
> should be called only when WaitLatch() returns with WL_TIMEOUT?

Thanks, I didn't notice that.
I'll fix it.

> -       <function>XLogFlush</function> request(see <xref
> linkend="wal-configuration"/>)
> +       <function>XLogFlush</function> request(see <xref
> linkend="wal-configuration"/>),
> +       or WAL data written out to disk by WAL receiver.
> 
> So regarding walreceiver, only wal_write, wal_write_time, wal_sync, and
> wal_sync_time are updated even while the other values are not. Isn't 
> this
> confusing to users? If so, what about reporting those walreceiver stats 
> in
> pg_stat_wal_receiver?

OK, I'll add new infrastructure code to interect with wal receiver
and stats collector and show the stats in pg_stat_wal_receiver.

>                  if (endofwal)
> +                {
> +                    /* Send WAL statistics to the stats collector */
> +                    pgstat_send_wal();
>                      break;
> 
> You added pgstat_send_wal() so that it's called in some cases where
> walreceiver exits. But ISTM that there are other walreceiver-exit 
> cases.
> For example, in the case where SIGTERM is received. Instead,
> pgstat_send_wal() should be called in WalRcvDie() for those all cases?

Thanks, I forgot the case.
I'll fix it.

Regards,
-- 
Masahiro Ikeda
NTT DATA CORPORATION