Re: Patch to send transaction commit/rollback stats to the stats collector unconditionally.

From: Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet(at)singh(dot)im>
To: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch to send transaction commit/rollback stats to the stats collector unconditionally.
Date: 2014-07-01 23:32:53
Message-ID: CABwTF4UEcF+3h6khWSdr-RpZ72Hg2D-gZZJRT4+ZjH-kXnHgVQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> If we're going to do it like this, then I think the force flag
>> should be considered to do nothing except override the clock
>> check, which probably means it shouldn't be tested in the initial
>> if() at all.
>
> That makes sense, and is easily done.

Attached is the patch to save you a few key strokes :)

> The only question left is
> how far back to take the patch. I'm inclined to only apply it to
> master and 9.4. Does anyone think otherwise?

Considering this as a bug-fix, I'd vote for it to be applied to all
supported releases. But since this may cause unforeseen performance
penalty, I think it should be applied only as far back as the
introduction of PGSTAT_STAT_INTERVAL throttle.

The throttle was implemeted in 641912b, which AFAICT was part of 8.3.
So I guess all the supported releases it is.

Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/

EDB : www.EnterpriseDB.com : The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Attachment Content-Type Size
report_xact_stats_unconditionally-v3.diff text/plain 1.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-07-02 00:15:22 Re: SQL access to database attributes
Previous Message Mark Kirkwood 2014-07-01 23:28:10 Re: Wait free LW_SHARED acquisition