From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Tracking last scan time |
Date: | 2022-08-31 16:02:33 |
Message-ID: | CA+OCxoyW+T=xUdehU=oDcHeK-qw7ToaSvy0aOpbdWAa4Q_iL4w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 at 19:46, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 02:05:36PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 at 01:44, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I don't have a particular opinion about the patch, I'm just pointing
> > out that there are other ways. Even just writing down the numbers on
> a
> > post-it note and coming back in a month to see if they've changed is
> > enough to tell if the table or index has been used.
> >
> >
> > There are usually other ways to perform monitoring tasks, but there is
> > something to be said for the convenience of having functionality built
> in and
> > not having to rely on tools, scripts, or post-it notes :-)
>
> Should we consider using something cheaper like time() so we don't need
> a GUC to enable this?
>
Interesting idea, but on my mac at least, 100,000,000 gettimeofday() calls
takes about 2 seconds, whilst 100,000,000 time() calls takes 14(!) seconds.
--
Dave Page
Blog: https://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Reid Thompson | 2022-08-31 16:03:06 | Add tracking of backend memory allocated to pg_stat_activity |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2022-08-31 15:59:38 | Re: SQL/JSON features for v15 |