| From: | KONDO Mitsumasa <kondo(dot)mitsumasa(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add min and max execute statement time in pg_stat_statement |
| Date: | 2013-11-15 02:28:26 |
| Message-ID: | 528586CA.8010106@lab.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
(2013/11/14 7:11), Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Hmm, now if we had portable atomic addition, so that we could spare the
>> spinlock ...
> And adding a histogram or
> min/max for something like execution time isn't an approach that can
> be made to work for every existing cost tracked by pg_stat_statements.
> So, taking all that into consideration, I'm afraid this patch gets a
> -1 from me.
It is confirmation just to make sure, does "this patch" mean my patch? I agree
with you about not adding another lock implementation. It will becomes overhead.
Regards,
--
Mitsumasa KONDO
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2013-11-15 02:31:35 | Re: Add min and max execute statement time in pg_stat_statement |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2013-11-15 02:24:31 | Re: Add min and max execute statement time in pg_stat_statement |