Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Why our counters need to be time-based WAS: WIP: cross column correlation ...

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why our counters need to be time-based WAS: WIP: cross column correlation ...
Date: 2011-02-28 18:50:03
Message-ID: 27252.1298919003@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> On 2/28/11 10:24 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>>> On the other hand, anything which increases the size of pg_statistic
>>> would be a nightmare.

>> Hmm?

> Like replacing each statistic with a series of time-based buckets, which
> would then increase the size of the table by 5X to 10X.  That was the
> first solution I thought of, and rejected.

I think Josh is thinking of the stats collector's dump file, not
pg_statistic.

Ultimately we need to think of a reporting mechanism that's a bit
smarter than "rewrite the whole file for any update" ...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2011-02-28 18:53:26
Subject: Re: knngist - 0.8
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2011-02-28 18:49:07
Subject: Re: mysql2pgsql.perl update

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group