Re: Add min and max execute statement time in pg_stat_statement

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: KONDO Mitsumasa <kondo(dot)mitsumasa(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Add min and max execute statement time in pg_stat_statement
Date: 2014-01-22 00:34:38
Message-ID: CA+U5nMJ75mkDA0s+Dff0EjKtn5wcTeXzmnj4OYUhxhOa7+YWzg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 21 January 2014 21:19, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> I agree with people saying that stddev is better than nothing at all,
>> so I am inclined to commit this, in spite of the above.
>
> I could live with stddev. But we really ought to be investing in
> making pg_stat_statements work well with third-party tools. I am very
> wary of enlarging the counters structure, because it is protected by a
> spinlock. There has been no attempt to quantify that cost, nor has
> anyone even theorized that it is not likely to be appreciable.

OK, Kondo, please demonstrate benchmarks that show we have <1% impact
from this change. Otherwise we may need a config parameter to allow
the calculation.

Thanks very much.

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2014-01-22 00:34:45 Re: Hard limit on WAL space used (because PANIC sucks)
Previous Message Harold Giménez 2014-01-22 00:32:44 Re: proposal: hide application_name from other users