| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | A J <s5aly(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Confused by 'timing' results |
| Date: | 2010-09-02 16:49:06 |
| Message-ID: | 25773.1283446146@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
A J <s5aly(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> The problem I am now facing in using log_min_duration_statement is that all the
> clients have to write to a single log file in the pg_log directory. So they have
> to wait for the other writes to happen before completing their write. This seems
> to be reason why the measured duration in the log file (for several concurrent
> clients) is way more, infact much more than what was measured by psql timing
> from the client side.
Do you have any actual evidence for that being the problem, as opposed
to some other effect? Because I don't recall anybody else complaining
about this.
Personally I'd wonder for example about whether the server has a really
slow gettimeofday()...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kong Mansatiansin | 2010-09-02 16:56:57 | Re: Query Optimization with Partitioned Tables |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-09-02 16:48:58 | Re: Confused by 'timing' results |