Re: Why our counters need to be time-based WAS: WIP: cross column correlation ...

From: Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why our counters need to be time-based WAS: WIP: cross column correlation ...
Date: 2011-03-02 12:29:59
Message-ID: 0AE678865F4AF306819AF4E4@[172.26.14.62]
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

--On 28. Februar 2011 15:02:30 -0500 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Because it's fifty times more mechanism than we need here? We don't
> want a SQL interface (not even a lightweight one) and it's unclear that
> we ever want the data to go to disk at all.

I wonder wether a library like librrd would be a solution for this.

--
Thanks

Bernd

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Yeb Havinga 2011-03-02 12:56:20 Re: Sync Rep v17
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2011-03-02 11:22:56 Re: Sync Rep v17