From: | Igor Calabria <igor(dot)calabria(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Adding percentile metrics to pg_stat_statements module |
Date: | 2019-11-01 16:05:02 |
Message-ID: | CA+r4MrSa1118vM7BVkhOcY6N7GHwZbj6mPm84-_=dsALFZP31Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> That's not what I wrote. My point was that we *should* store the digests
> themselves, otherwise we just introduce additional errors into the
> estimates, because it discards the weights/frequencies.
Sorry. I meant to write "no reason to *not* store the digests"
Em sex, 1 de nov de 2019 às 11:17, Tomas Vondra <
tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> escreveu:
> On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 11:11:13AM -0300, Igor Calabria wrote:
> >Yeah, I agree that there's no reason to store the digests themselves and I
> >really liked the idea of it being optional.
>
> That's not what I wrote. My point was that we *should* store the digests
> themselves, otherwise we just introduce additional errors into the
> estimates, because it discards the weights/frequencies.
>
> >If it turns out that memory consumption on real workloads is small enough,
> >it could eventually be turned on by default.
> >
>
> Maybe, but it's not just about memory consumption. CPU matters too.
>
> regards
>
> --
> Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2019-11-01 16:09:49 | Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-11-01 16:00:38 | Re: On disable_cost |