| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | torikoshia <torikoshia(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Add new option 'all' to pg_stat_reset_shared() |
| Date: | 2023-11-09 01:29:52 |
| Message-ID: | 20231109012952.fft2i356ofljugt6@awork3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2023-11-09 10:25:18 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 10:10:39AM +0900, torikoshia wrote:
> > I am a little concerned about that the reset time is not the same and that
> > GetCurrentTimestamp() is called multiple times, but I think it would be
> > acceptable because the function is probably not used that often and the
> > reset time is not atomic in practice.
>
> Arf, right. I misremembered that this is just a clock_timestamp() so
> that's not transaction-resilient. Anyway, my take is that this is not
> a big deal in practice compared to the usability of the wrapper.
It seems inconsequential cost-wise. Resetting stats is way more expensive that
a few timestamp determinations. Correctness wise it actually seems *better* to
record the timestamps more granularly, after all, that moves them closer to
the time the individual kind of stats is reset.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2023-11-09 01:32:50 | Re: make pg_ctl more friendly |
| Previous Message | Crisp Lee | 2023-11-09 01:29:32 | Re: make pg_ctl more friendly |