Re: bgwriter stats

Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> This seems quite a bizarre way to do things.  Why wouldn't you implement
>> this functionality by shipping messages to the stats collector?

> Would that have any benefits over the shmem approach?

Well, for one thing, it would fit naturally into the existing stats
structure instead of being a wart on the side.  The problem of atomic
access to an int64 would go away, yet we'd still be able to keep a
running int64 total of the reports.  You wouldn't lose the total over a
shutdown/restart.  The value would obey the transactional-snapshot rules
we've established for stats output, making it safe to try to correlate
it with other stats.  Probably a few other things I'm not thinking of...

            regards, tom lane