Re: auto_explain sample rate

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: auto_explain sample rate
Date: 2015-06-03 12:04:34
Message-ID: 20150603120434.GA18006@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2015-06-03 18:54:24 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> OK, here we go.

Hm. Wouldn't random sampling be better than what you do? If your queries
have a pattern to them (e.g. you always issue the same 10 queries in
succession), this will possibly only show a subset of the queries.

I think a formulation in fraction (i.e. a float between 0 and 1) will
also be easier to understand.

Andres

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-06-03 12:22:24 Re: Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2015-06-03 11:34:38 Re: why does txid_current() assign new transaction-id?