From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Amit Khandekar <amit(dot)khandekar(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Show lossy heap block info in EXPLAIN ANALYZE for bitmap heap scan |
Date: | 2014-01-13 19:48:33 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZp_jb0cNN0d9UCcJD+nM6YH2s7v9MD1ri8gf6Km8o53w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Robert Haas wrote:
>> > Hmm, fair point. But I'm still not convinced that we really need to
>> > add extra accounting for this. What's wrong with just reporting the
>> > number of exact and lossy pages?
>
>> No. I intended to show the desired memory space for a TIDBitmap rather
>> than the peak memory usage for that TIDBitmap. And I thought it'd be
> better
>> for the latter to be displayed as additional information. However, I've
>> removed the functionality for showing the desired memory space due to
>> technical problems. Now I should probably remove the functionality for
>> showing the peak memory usage too.
>
>> Yes, as Andres mentioned, showing the peak memory usage is not a bad idea,
>> I think. But I start to think it's not necessarily worth complicating the
>> code ...
>
>> If there are no objections of others, I'll remove extra accounting for
>> showing the peak memory usage.
>
> Done. Please find attached a patch.
Looks good to me, so committed.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-01-13 19:55:50 | Re: ALTER SYSTEM SET command to change postgresql.conf parameters |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2014-01-13 18:56:00 | Re: Linux kernel impact on PostgreSQL performance |