On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 11:29 PM Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 3:53 PM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > I think we should consider deprecating the pg_stat_bgwriter columns but > > leaving them in place for a few years. New stuff should only be added to > > pg_stat_checkpointer, but we don't need to break old monitoring queries. > > I vote to just remove them. I think that most people won't update > their queries until they are forced to do so. I don't think it > matters very much when we force them to do that. > > Our track record in following through on deprecations is pretty bad > too, which is another consideration.
Hm. I'm fine with either way. Even if we remove the checkpointer columns from pg_stat_bgwriter, the changes that one needs to do are so minimal and straightforward because the column names aren't changed, just the view name. Having said that, I don't have a strong opinion here. I'll leave it to the other hacker's opinion and/or committer's discretion. FWIW - here's the v2 patch that gets rid of checkpointer columns from pg_stat_bgwriter https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACX8jFET1C3bs_edz_8JRcMg5nz8Y7ryjGaCsfnVpAYoVQ%40mail.gmail.com and here's the v3 patch that deprecates https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACUjEvPQYGJHmH2FrAj1gmvHskNrOeNUr7xnwjtkYVZvEQ%40mail.gmail.com. -- Bharath Rupireddy PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
