Re: shared-memory based stats collector

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, magnus(at)hagander(dot)net, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: shared-memory based stats collector
Date: 2018-07-11 00:06:05
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2018-07-10 14:52:13 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> There's one more reason why attempts to keep stats snapshots "perfectly"
> consistent are likely doomed to fail - the messages are sent over UDP, which
> does not guarantee delivery etc. So there's always some level of possible
> inconsistency even with "perfectly consistent" snapshots.

FWIW, I don't see us continuing to do so if we go for a shared hashtable
for stats.

- Andres

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-07-11 00:06:24 TRUNCATE tables referenced by FKs on partitioned tables
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2018-07-10 23:58:20 Re: Non-reserved replication slots and slot advancing