Re: Missing wait events (gap analysis)
| От | Andres Freund |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Missing wait events (gap analysis) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | m46aym5wqzfxg6jos5ylb27cy2c27f2uxhrm3r3unyya6ncjb4@cn7q5vdkjalv обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Missing wait events (gap analysis) (Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik@postgres.ai>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On 2025-11-21 18:43:31 -0600, Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote: > Many tools that implement wait event analysis, when visualizing samples > with "wait_event is null" use green color and "CPU" (perhaps, it started > with RDS Performance Insights and PASH Viewer and, I suppose, originally > came from the Oracle world, and now I see it in many more places). > > I don't have any concerns with green color, but always had a feeling that > "coalesce(wait_event, 'CPU')" is an assumption that can make analysis > inaccurate, because there may be a lot of places in the code that are not > covered by wait events, but technically should -- and such places cannot be > named "CPU". > > I asked Claude Code to analyze Postgres source code and find such places, > that we could potentially cover with more wait events. Here is the first > result: > https://github.com/NikolayS/postgres/blob/claude/cpu-asterisk-wait-events-01CyiYYMMcFMovuqPqLNcp8T/WAIT_EVENTS_ANALYSIS.md > > Before moving forward with proposals of specific patches, I wanted to hear > opinions -- does it make sense to work in this direction? Some of this seems sensible. However, I vehemently oppose turning wait events into a poor emulation of a CPU profiler. I think it would lead us down a bad path to add wait events for CPU activity. It'd just lead us to adding them everywhere, ending up with wait events (CPU activity is not a wait!) having significant costs. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: