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

Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation)

From: Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation)
Date: 2012-03-28 23:52:23
Message-ID: CAEYLb_VFs62WXwtQTejz125hhAPammeZpKJBbpN-wB46UOa_Bg@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 29 March 2012 00:14, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I'm planning to commit the patch with a USAGE_NON_EXEC_STICK value
> of 3.0, which is the largest value that stays below 10% wastage.
> We can twiddle that logic later, so if you want to experiment with an
> alternate decay rule, feel free.

I think I may well end up doing so when I get a chance. This seems
like the kind of problem that will be solved only when we get some
practical experience (i.e. use the tool on something closer to a
production system than the regression tests).

doc-patch is attached. I'm not sure if I got the balance right - it
may be on the verbose side.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services

Attachment: pg_stat_statements_norm_docs.patch
Description: application/octet-stream (9.6 KB)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Joachim WielandDate: 2012-03-29 00:28:54
Subject: Re: patch for parallel pg_dump
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2012-03-28 23:14:43
Subject: Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation)

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