Re: Performance monitor signal handler

From: Samuel Sieb <samuel(at)sieb(dot)net>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Performance monitor signal handler
Date: 2001-03-17 16:21:13
Message-ID: 20010317082113.A1238@gw.sieb.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 09:33:03AM -0500, Jan Wieck wrote:
>
> The general problem remains. We only have one central
> collector with a limited receive capacity. The more load is
> on the machine, the smaller it's capacity gets. The more
> complex the DB schemas get and the more load is on the
> system, the more interesting accurate statistics get. Both
> factors are contraproductive. More complex schema means more
> tables and thus bigger messages. More load means more
> messages. Having good statistics on a toy system while they
> get worse for a web backend server that's really under
> pressure is braindead from the start.
>
Just as another suggestion, what about sending the data to a different
computer, so instead of tying up the database server with processing the
statistics, you have another computer that has some free time to do the
processing.

Some drawbacks are that you can't automatically start/restart it from the
postmaster and it will put a little more load on the network, but it seems
to mostly solve the issues of blocked pipes and using too much cpu time
on the database server.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-03-17 16:37:17 Re: beta6 pg_restore core dumps
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2001-03-17 14:33:03 Re: Performance monitor signal handler