On Dec 18, 2010, at 8:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> writes:
>> I've done several small changes to the patch, namely
>> - added docs for the functions (in SGML)
>> - added the same thing for background writer
>> So I think now it's 'complete' and I'll add it to the commit fest in a
>> few minutes.
> Please split this into separate patches for database-level and
> table-level tracking, because I think it's highly likely that the latter
> will get rejected. We have had multiple complaints already about the
> size of the stats file for databases with many tables. I don't believe
> that it's worth bloating the per-table entries even further with this
> information. Tracking reset time it per-database doesn't seem like a
> problem though.
Is there a reason this info needs to be tracked in the stats table? I know it's the most obvious place, but since we're worried about the size of it, what about tracking it in pg_class or somewhere else?
Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect jim(at)nasby(dot)net
512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Dimitri Fontaine||Date: 2010-12-19 18:35:08|
|Subject: Re: Extensions and custom_variable_classes|
|Previous:||From: Jim Nasby||Date: 2010-12-19 18:10:35|
|Subject: Re: Can postgres create a file with physically continuous blocks.|