Re: stats_block_level

On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 10:15 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > 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.
> >
> It gets my vote.

Look to -patches for an implementation of the above.

--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com