Re: shared-memory based stats collector

From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com
Cc: andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru, alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, ah(at)cybertec(dot)at, 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: 2019-04-10 00:39:29
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At Tue, 9 Apr 2019 17:03:33 +0200, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote in <20190409150333(dot)5iashyjxm5jmraml(at)development>
> Unfortunately, now that we're past code freeze it's clear this is a
> PG12
> matter now :-(
> I personally consider this to be very worthwhile & beneficial
> improvement,
> but I agree with Andres the patch did not quite get to committable
> state
> in the last CF. Conidering how sensitive part it touches, I suggest we
> try
> to get it committed early in the PG13 cycle. I'm willing to spend some
> time on doing test/benchmarks and reviewing the code, if needed.

I'm very happy to be told that. Actually the code was a rush work
(mainly for reverting refactoring) and left some stupid
mistakes. I'm going through on the patch again and polish code.

Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2019-04-10 01:48:38 Re: Problem with default partition pruning
Previous Message Amit Langote 2019-04-10 00:34:43 Re: more isolation tests for update tuple routing