| From: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Dave Page" <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: stats_block_level |
| Date: | 2007-07-27 08:42:00 |
| Message-ID: | 1185525720.4191.2.camel@ebony.site |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 04:29 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > Any reason not to just fold them both into stats_start_collector ?
> > >
> > > Well, then you couldn't turn collection on and off without restarting
> > > the postmaster, which might be a pain.
> >
> > Maybe we don't actually need stats_start_collector, but instead we start
> > it always and just have one knob to turn collection on and off. I'm
> > not sure whether the extra process would bother people if they're not
> > collecting, but we have so many extra processes now, why would anyone
> > care.
>
> I agree. Let's remove stats_start_collector and merge the other two
> into a single setting. Anything more than that is overkill.
>
> Having a single idle process is not a problem to anyone. It just sleeps
> all the time. We are all used to having six useless getty processes and
> nobody cares.
Yes, thats a great plan.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-07-27 08:42:08 | Re: default_text_search_config and expression indexes |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-07-27 08:29:13 | Re: stats_block_level |