| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation |
| Date: | 2012-01-22 22:58:55 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nMJyanCwh86mT_05SDkUbcPiAWgJ+9xAY8+0tc9nmPg1gw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> So, having received feedback from Tom and others in relation to this
> patch, I would like to state how I think I should go about addressing
> various concerns to ensure that a revision of the patch gets into the
> 9.2 release. As I've said time and again, I think that it is very
> important that we have this, sooner rather than later.
Nothing can be ensured completely, but I would add this is a very
important feature. Without it, large systems without prepared
statements are mostly untunable and therefore untuned, which is a bad
thing.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2012-01-22 23:14:28 | Re: Publish checkpoint timing and sync files summary data to pg_stat_bgwriter |
| Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2012-01-22 22:30:16 | Re: CLOG contention, part 2 |