| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM |
| Date: | 2006-01-29 01:10:58 |
| Message-ID: | 43DC1622.4050903@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Tom,
> I'd argue it's fine: there are tons of people using row-level stats
> via autovacuum, and (AFAICT) just about nobody using 'em for any other
> purpose. Certainly you never see anyone suggesting them as a tool for
> investigating problems on pgsql-performance.
Actually, I use the stats for performance tuning. However, I can't say
that I care about the exact numbers; I'm just looking for columns which
get "lots" of seq scans or indexes that don't get used.
--Josh
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tony Caduto | 2006-01-29 07:49:52 | Re: Seeking a better PL/pgSQL editor-debugger |
| Previous Message | Rich Shepard | 2006-01-29 00:02:07 | Re: Viewing Database Scheme |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete Dutra | 2006-01-29 01:48:57 | Re: Surrogate keys (Was: enums) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-01-28 16:13:36 | Re: stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM Question) |