Re: Command statistics system (cmdstats)

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "Smith, Peter" <peters(at)fast(dot)au(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, vinayak <Pokale_Vinayak_q3(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Subject: Re: Command statistics system (cmdstats)
Date: 2020-09-17 12:40:20
Message-ID: 20200917124020.GA3937@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2020-Sep-17, Michael Paquier wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 01:45:02PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > My spidey sense is tingling here, telling me that we need some actual
> > benchmarking.
>
> This patch has not received any replies after this comment for three
> months, so I am marking it as returned with feedback. I agree that
> this should be benchmarked carefully.

It seems fine to mark the patch as RwF at the end of commitfest, but
that's two weeks away. I don't understand what is accomplished by doing
it ahead of time, other than alienating the patch authors.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2020-09-17 12:47:54 Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2020-09-17 12:34:52 Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions