| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: monitoring usage count distribution |
| Date: | 2023-04-06 18:06:08 |
| Message-ID: | 20230406180608.GA275542@nathanxps13 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 01:32:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> There seems to be enough support for the existing summary function
> definition to leave it as-is; Andres likes it for one, and I'm not
> excited about trying to persuade him he's wrong. But a second
> slightly-less-aggregated summary function is clearly useful as well.
> So I'm now thinking that we do want the patch as-submitted.
> (Caveat: I've not read the patch, just the description.)
In case we want to do both, here's a 0002 that changes usagecount_avg to an
array of usage counts.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v2-0001-introduce-pg_buffercache_usage_counts.patch | text/x-diff | 9.9 KB |
| v2-0002-replace-usagecount_avg-with-an-array-of-usage-cou.patch | text/x-diff | 5.5 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2023-04-06 18:20:41 | Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints |
| Previous Message | Andrey Borodin | 2023-04-06 17:56:17 | Re: psql \watch 2nd argument: iteration count |