| From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hash id in pg_stat_statements |
| Date: | 2012-10-15 14:35:02 |
| Message-ID: | CAEYLb_U1rwGJWiy92pD=x+7ZFNju0nB91-WkDY-OAV9uvxPmeQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3 October 2012 19:04, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com> writes:
>> Instead, I think it makes sense to assign a number -- arbitrarily, but
>> uniquely -- to the generation of a new row in pg_stat_statements, and,
>> on the flip side, whenever a row is retired its number should be
>> eliminated, practically, for-ever. This way re-introductions between
>> two samplings of pg_stat_statements cannot be confused for a
>> contiguously maintained statistic on a query.
>
> This argument seems sensible to me.
Daniel: Could you please submit the patch that you were working on
that does this to the next commitfest?
--
Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2012-10-15 14:41:57 | Re: Deparsing DDL command strings |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2012-10-15 14:34:13 | Re: Truncate if exists |