Re: stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM Question)

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM Question)
Date: 2006-01-27 16:27:10
Message-ID: 20060127162710.GB18716@surnet.cl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I think this is unquestionably
> >> a bug, at least for autovacuum's purposes --- though it might be OK
> >> for the original intent of the stats system, which was simply to track
> >> activity levels.
> >>
> >> Any thoughts about how it ought to work?
>
> > I don't remember exactly how it works -- I think the activity (insert,
> > update, delete) counters are kept separately from commit/rollback
> > status, right? Maybe we should keep three separate counters: "current
> > transaction counters" and "counters for transactions that were
> > aborted/committed". We only send the latter counts, and the former are
> > added to them when the transaction ends.
>
> My question was at a higher level, actually: *what* should we be
> counting?

Oh, I see. Do you think small incremental improvements to the stat
system will buy us much? I think we should be thinking big here, i.e.
rewrite most stuff instead. In the meantime, we should fix the minor
issues but not spend too much time on it; IMHO anyway.

I can devote some time to it starting from, say, mid february, which is
when I think I'm going to have more time to spend on community stuff.
(I've been spending the last couple of months on PL/php and internal
Command Prompt stuff.)

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/5ZYLFMCVHXC
"XML!" Exclaimed C++. "What are you doing here? You're not a programming
language."
"Tell that to the people who use me," said XML.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rick Gigger 2006-01-27 16:39:25 Re: incremental backups
Previous Message Aaron Colflesh 2006-01-27 16:25:00 Allowing Custom Fields

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-01-27 16:47:32 Re: stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM Question)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-01-27 16:20:17 Re: Adding a --quiet option to initdb