Re: Profiling vs autovacuum

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Profiling vs autovacuum
Date: 2007-11-04 07:36:40
Message-ID: 87640isbqv.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

>> However, accumulation of zillions of gmon.out files is definitely a
>> downside of the approach; one that I've noticed myself.

> Comments?

All I can add is that I've run into this problem myself too.

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support!

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2007-11-04 09:05:27 Re: Asynchronous commit documentation gap
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-11-04 03:06:21 Profiling vs autovacuum (was Re: building 8.3beta2 w/ 'make check' consumes A LOT of disk space)