Re: contrib/pg_stat_statements 1202

From: "Alex Hunsaker" <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: contrib/pg_stat_statements 1202
Date: 2008-12-09 17:07:04
Message-ID: 34d269d40812090907h764879f1k6f18962e9bc69041@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 23:28, ITAGAKI Takahiro
<itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>
> "Alex Hunsaker" <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I was assigned to review this.
>
> Thanks for your reviewing.

> I assume that the basic concepts are ok and focus of discussion is in:
> - New counters in struct Instrumentation.
> (buffer usage and CPU usage)
> - Should EXPLAIN ANALYZE show those counters.

Right, I would split out your next patch in 3 parts: the hooks you
need, contrib module and the new counters. I think I saw older
versions of the patch that did this... just got lost for this version?

>
>> Performance review
>> HEAD: tps = 9.674423
>> PATCH: tps = 9.695784
>>
>> If it claims to improve performance, does it?
>> Does it slow down other things?

> The patch should not slow down normal use if you don't use
> pg_stat_statements module, but it might slow down EXPLAIN ANALYZE
> because some fields are added in struct Instrumentation and
> they are counted up per tuple in EXPLAIN ANALYZE.

Err yes sorry I was just following
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Reviewing_a_Patch, those two did not
seem pertainant so I did not answer them.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Radek Strnad 2008-12-09 17:10:41 Parser - keyword cathegory
Previous Message Andrew Chernow 2008-12-09 17:06:53 Re: parallel restore vs. windows