Re: pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

From: Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: Daniel Farina <drfarina(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation
Date: 2012-12-30 03:12:34
Message-ID: CAEYLb_X_CBN2X2VU1_AeTUVK7Xr4fVWO=F2qA8UE-kYasR_6Cw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 30 December 2012 02:45, Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> As I recall, the gist of this objection had to do with a false sense
> of stability of the hash value, and the desire to enforce the ability
> to alter it. Here's an option: xor the hash value with the
> 'statistics session id', so it's *known* to be unstable between
> sessions. That gets you continuity in the common case and sound
> deprecation in the less-common cases (crashes, format upgrades, stat
> resetting).

Hmm. I like the idea, but a concern there would be that you'd
introduce additional scope for collisions in the third-party utility
building time-series data from snapshots. I currently put the
probability of a collision within pg_stat_statements as 1% in the
event of a pg_stat_statements.max of 10,000.

--
Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Farina 2012-12-30 03:16:39 Re: pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation
Previous Message Greg Smith 2012-12-30 03:07:45 Re: buffer assertion tripping under repeat pgbench load