| From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_stat_*_columns? |
| Date: | 2015-06-24 18:03:10 |
| Message-ID: | CAMkU=1y2LLEDeZ1X3AbsR4NChCn9Cz3=W8WSv0-ninOJjYZyCw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com> wrote:
> > Is there any chance the project would accept a patch which adds the
> > pg_stat_*_columns-feature without first optimizing the collector?
>
> I doubt it. It's such a pain point already that massively increasing
> the amount of data we need to store does not seem like a good plan.
>
What if the increase only happened for people who turned on
track_column_usage?
Cheers,
Jeff
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2015-06-24 18:03:49 | Re: UPSERT on partition |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2015-06-24 18:02:36 | Re: UPSERT on partition |