Re: Performance monitor signal handler

From: Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net>
To: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Performance monitor signal handler
Date: 2001-03-13 14:59:48
Message-ID: 20010313065948.V29888@fw.wintelcom.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> [010313 06:42] wrote:
> >
> >This ought to always give a consistant snapshot of the file to
> >whomever opens it.
> >
>
> I think Tom has previously stated that there are technical reasons not to
> do IO in signal handlers, and I have philosophical problems with
> performance monitors that ask 50 backends to do file IO. I really do think
> shared memory is TWTG.

I wasn't really suggesting any of those courses of action, all I
suggested was using rename(2) to give a seperate appilcation a
consistant snapshot of the stats.

Actually, what makes the most sense (although it may be a performance
killer) is to have the backends update a system table that the external
app can query.

--
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net|alfred(at)freebsd(dot)org]
Daemon News Magazine in your snail-mail! http://magazine.daemonnews.org/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-03-13 15:00:35 Re: Performance monitor
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-03-13 14:57:42 Re: Performance monitor