| From: | Daniel Farina <daniel(at)fdr(dot)io> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sameer Thakur <samthakur74(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pg(at)heroku(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation |
| Date: | 2013-09-30 05:58:58 |
| Message-ID: | CACN56+OMo=fvAmg2LTt7HdKO1_ZB0LTXMs6J1eyea_KQurUmrQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Sameer Thakur <samthakur74(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Yes i was. Just saw a warning when pg_stat_statements is loaded that
> valid values for pg_stat_statements.max is between 100 and 2147483647.
> Not sure why though.
I remember hacking that out for testing sake.
I can only justify it as a foot-gun to prevent someone from being
stuck restarting the database to get a reasonable number in there.
Let's CC Peter; maybe he can remember some thoughts about that.
Also, for onlookers, I have changed this patch around to do the
date-oriented stuff but want to look it over before stapling it up and
sending it. If one cannot wait, one can look at
https://github.com/fdr/postgres/tree/queryid. The squashed-version of
that history contains a reasonable patch I think, but a re-read often
finds something for me and I've only just completed it yesterday.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Cédric Villemain | 2013-09-30 06:50:38 | Re: Bugfix and new feature for PGXS |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2013-09-30 04:55:46 | Re: Compression of full-page-writes |