On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 6:14 PM Julien Rouhaud <rjuju...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 03:52:38PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > I think the right place to compute this information is > > XLogRecordAssemble even though we update it at the place where you > > have it in the patch. You can probably compute that in local > > variables and then transfer to pgWalUsage in XLogInsertRecord. I am > > fine if you can think of some other way but the current patch doesn't > > seem correct to me. > > My previous approach was indeed totally broken. v8 attached which hopefully > will be ok. >
This is better. Few more comments: 1. The point (c) from my previous email doesn't seem to be fixed properly. Basically, the record data is only attached with FPW in some particular cases like where REGBUF_KEEP_DATA is set, but the patch assumes it is always set. 2. + /* Report a full page imsage constructed for the WAL record */ + *num_fpw += 1; Typo. /imsage/image 3. We need to enhance the patch to cover WAL usage for parallel vacuum and parallel create index based on Sawada-San's latest patch[1] which fixed the case for buffer usage. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2Bfd4k5L4yVoWz0smymmqB4_SMHd2tyJExUgA_ACsL7k00B5XQ%40mail.gmail.com -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
