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.
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 |