Hi,

In PostgreSQL, the pg_stat_io view provides detailed statistics on I/O
operations. Background process perform maintenance tasks and other
background operations essential to the functioning of the PostgreSQL
database.
They include processes such as:

1. Autovacuum Workers
2. WAL Writer
3. Background Writer
4. Logical Replication Workers
5. Custom Background Workers

In the pg_stat_io view, statistics related to I/O operations performed by
these background workers are recorded.

Regards,
Imtiaz


On Wed, 15 May 2024, 01:26 Dimitrios Apostolou, <ji...@gmx.net> wrote:

> Hello list,
>
> what is the "background worker" in the pg_stat_io statistics view? I'm
> reading the documentation but can't figure this one out knowing that it is
> not autovacuum or bgwriter. And I'm not aware of any extension I might
> have with registered background worker.
>
> Additionally, how can it be evictions > writes? I would expect every
> eviction to cause a write.
>
> Finally about "hits", I understand they are reads found in shared_buffers,
> so they never registered into the "reads" counter. So is "reads" in
> pg_stat_io the equivalent to misses, i.e. the opposite of "hits", the read
> attempts not found in the shared_buffers, that needed to be fetched from
> the disk (or OS buffercache)?
>
>     backend_type    |    object     | context |  reads  |  read_time  |
> writes | write_time | writebacks | writeback_time | extends | extend_time |
> op_bytes |   hits    | evictions | reuses | fsyncs | fsync_time |
> stats_reset
>
> -------------------+---------------+---------+---------+-------------+--------+------------+------------+----------------+---------+-------------+----------+-----------+-----------+--------+--------+------------+-------------------------------
>   background worker | relation      | normal  | 5139575 | 2196288.011 |
> 63277 |    1766.94 |          0 |              0 |       0 |           0 |
>    8192 | 876913705 |   5139653 |        |      0 |          0 | 2024-04-08
> 08:50:02.971192+00
>
>
> Thank you in advance,
> Dimitris
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to