Re: [HACKERS] [FEATURE PATCH] pg_stat_statements with plans (v02)

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Julian Markwort <julian(dot)markwort(at)uni-muenster(dot)de>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, marius(dot)timmer(at)uni-muenster(dot)de, arne(dot)scheffer(at)uni-muenster(dot)de
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [FEATURE PATCH] pg_stat_statements with plans (v02)
Date: 2018-01-11 14:43:44
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 03:05:39PM +0100, Julian Markwort wrote:
> Hello hackers,
> I'd like to follow up to my previous proposition of tracking (some) best and
> worst plans for different queries in the pg_stat_statements extension.
> Based on the comments and suggestions made towards my last endeavour, I've
> taken the path of computing the interquartile distance (by means of an
> adapted z-test, under the assumption of normal distribution, based on the
> mean_time and stddev_time already used by the extension).

Is the assumption of a normal distribution reasonable for outlier
plans as you've seen them?

David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Phone: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres:

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2018-01-11 15:16:19 Re: pl/perl extension fails on Windows
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2018-01-11 14:36:41 Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE of partition key