From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | legrand legrand <legrand_legrand(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Planning counters in pg_stat_statements (using pgss_store) |
Date: | 2020-04-09 03:59:43 |
Message-ID: | 5d54ce90-6807-83f9-aec2-4100152acab0@oss.nttdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020/04/08 18:31, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 05:37:27PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2020/04/03 16:26, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 01:04:28PM -0700, legrand legrand wrote:
>>>> Fujii Masao-4 wrote
>>>>> On 2020/04/01 18:19, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Finally I pushed the patch!
>>>>> Many thanks for all involved in this patch!
>>>>>
>>>>> As a remaining TODO item, I'm thinking that the document would need to
>>>>> be improved. For example, previously the query was not stored in pgss
>>>>> when it failed. But, in v13, if pgss_planning is enabled, such a query is
>>>>> stored because the planning succeeds. Without the explanation about
>>>>> that behavior in the document, I'm afraid that users will get confused.
>>>>> Thought?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you all for this work and especially to Julian for its major
>>>> contribution !
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot to everyone! This was quite a long journey.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Regarding the TODO point: Yes I agree that it can be improved.
>>>> My proposal:
>>>>
>>>> "Note that planning and execution statistics are updated only at their
>>>> respective end phase, and only for successfull operations.
>>>> For exemple executions counters of a long running SELECT query,
>>>> will be updated at the execution end, without showing any progress
>>>> report in the interval.
>>>> Other exemple, if the statement is successfully planned but fails in
>>>> the execution phase, only its planning statistics are stored.
>>>> This may give uncorrelated plans vs calls informations."
>>
>> Thanks for the proposal!
>>
>>> There are numerous reasons for lack of correlation between number of planning
>>> and number of execution, so I'm afraid that this will give users the false
>>> impression that only failed execution can lead to that.
>>>
>>> Here's some enhancement on your proposal:
>>>
>>> "Note that planning and execution statistics are updated only at their
>>> respective end phase, and only for successful operations.
>>> For example the execution counters of a long running query
>>> will only be updated at the execution end, without showing any progress
>>> report before that.
>>
>> Probably since this is not the example for explaining the relationship of
>> planning and execution stats, it's better to explain this separately or just
>> drop it?
>>
>> What about the attached patch based on your proposals?
>>
>
> Thanks Fuji-san, it looks perfect to me!
Thanks for the check! Pushed!
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2020-04-09 04:00:03 | Re: Planning counters in pg_stat_statements (using pgss_store) |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2020-04-09 03:54:06 | Re: [PATCH] Support built control file in PGXS VPATH builds |