Re: May be BUG. Periodic burst growth of the checkpoint_req counter on replica.
От | Fujii Masao |
---|---|
Тема | Re: May be BUG. Periodic burst growth of the checkpoint_req counter on replica. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 82f03b0b-00c6-42b4-95c7-f2eca7fed1ea@oss.nttdata.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | May be BUG. Periodic burst growth of the checkpoint_req counter on replica. ("Anton A. Melnikov" <aamelnikov@inbox.ru>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2024/09/18 23:35, Anton A. Melnikov wrote: > Fujii, Alexander thanks a lot! > > On 17.09.2024 05:47, Fujii Masao wrote: >> >> Regarding the patch: >> if (do_restartpoint) >> PendingCheckpointerStats.restartpoints_performed++; >> + else >> + PendingCheckpointerStats.num_performed++; >> >> I expected the counter not to be incremented when a checkpoint is skipped, >> but in this code, when a checkpoint is skipped, ckpt_performed is set to true, >> triggering the counter increment. This seems wrong. > > Tried to fix it via returning bool value from the CreateCheckPoint() > similarly to the CreateRestartPoint(). > > And slightly adjusted the patch so that it could be applied after yours. Thanks for updating the patch! -void +bool CreateCheckPoint(int flags) It would be helpful to explain the new return value in the comment at the top of this function. - CreateCheckPoint(flags); - ckpt_performed = true; + ckpt_performed = CreateCheckPoint(flags); This change could result in the next scheduled checkpoint being triggered in 15 seconds if a checkpoint is skipped, which isn’t the intended behavior. -{ oid => '2769', +{ oid => '6347', I don't think that the existing functions need to be reassigned new OIDs. Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: