Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Stats collector performance improvement

From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Stats collector performance improvement
Date: 2006-01-03 04:06:57
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patchespgsql-performance
On 1/2/2006 3:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

> [ moving to -hackers ]
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> I did some research on this because the numbers Tom quotes indicate there
>> is something wrong in the way we process stats_command_string
>> statistics.
>> [ ... proposed patch that seems pretty klugy to me ... ]
> I wonder whether we shouldn't consider something more drastic, like
> getting rid of the intermediate stats buffer process entirely.
> The original design for the stats communication code was based on the
> premise that it's better to drop data than to make backends wait on

The original design was geared towards searching for useless/missing 
indexes and tuning activity like that. This never happened, but instead 
people tried to use it as a reliable debugging or access statistics aid 
... which is fine but not what it originally was intended for.

So yes, I think looking at what it usually is used for, a message 
passing system like SysV message queues (puke) or similar would do a 
better job.


> the stats collector.  However, as things have turned out I think this
> notion is a flop: the people who are using stats at all want the stats
> to be reliable.  We've certainly seen plenty of gripes from people who
> are unhappy that backend-exit messages got dropped, and anyone who's
> using autovacuum would really like the tuple update counts to be pretty
> solid too.
> If we abandoned the unreliable-communication approach, could we build
> something with less overhead?
> 			regards, tom lane

# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2006-01-03 09:40:53
Subject: Re: Stats collector performance improvement
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-01-02 21:48:45
Subject: Re: Stats collector performance improvement

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Doug RoyerDate: 2006-01-03 05:11:04
Subject: Re: EINTR error in SunOS
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2006-01-02 23:52:13
Subject: Re: psql & readline & win32

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2006-01-03 05:09:29
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #2129: dblink problem
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-01-03 02:47:57
Subject: ShmemIndexLock rewrite

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group