From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2 |
Date: | 2006-06-22 21:08:50 |
Message-ID: | 7038.1151010530@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Or do you mean that you have stats_row_level and/or stats_block_level on
>> in all four cases?
> yes - stats_row_level and stats_block_level on in all cases (sorry for
> the confusion) - I can easily redo the tests without those - but that's
> what I had in the running conf and I only remember that after I was
> nearly done with all the testing :-)
It'd be interesting to compare 8.1 and HEAD for the no-overhead case;
I don't think you need to redo all four cases, but I'd like to see that one.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-06-22 21:22:19 | Re: [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-06-22 21:06:14 | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2006-06-22 21:37:31 | Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2 |
Previous Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2006-06-22 20:58:35 | Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2 |