From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
Cc: | KONDO Mitsumasa <kondo(dot)mitsumasa(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add min and max execute statement time in pg_stat_statement |
Date: | 2014-01-22 00:34:38 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMJ75mkDA0s+Dff0EjKtn5wcTeXzmnj4OYUhxhOa7+YWzg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 21 January 2014 21:19, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> I agree with people saying that stddev is better than nothing at all,
>> so I am inclined to commit this, in spite of the above.
>
> I could live with stddev. But we really ought to be investing in
> making pg_stat_statements work well with third-party tools. I am very
> wary of enlarging the counters structure, because it is protected by a
> spinlock. There has been no attempt to quantify that cost, nor has
> anyone even theorized that it is not likely to be appreciable.
OK, Kondo, please demonstrate benchmarks that show we have <1% impact
from this change. Otherwise we may need a config parameter to allow
the calculation.
Thanks very much.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2014-01-22 00:34:45 | Re: Hard limit on WAL space used (because PANIC sucks) |
Previous Message | Harold Giménez | 2014-01-22 00:32:44 | Re: proposal: hide application_name from other users |