Re: Add min and max execute statement time in pg_stat_statement

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, KONDO Mitsumasa <kondo(dot)mitsumasa(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Rajeev rastogi <rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com>, Mitsumasa KONDO <kondo(dot)mitsumasa(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Add min and max execute statement time in pg_stat_statement
Date: 2014-12-21 19:50:09
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12/21/2014 02:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> On 12/21/2014 01:23 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> The point, I think, is that without atomic instructions you have to hold
>>> a lock while incrementing the counters.
>> Hmm, do we do that now?
> We already have a spinlock mutex around the counter adjustment code, so
> I'm not sure why this discussion is being held.

Because Peter suggested we might be able to use atomics. I'm a bit
dubious that we can for min and max anyway.

>> I would like someone more versed in numerical analysis than me to
>> tell me how safe using sum of squares actually is in our case.
> That, on the other hand, might be a real issue. I'm afraid that
> accumulating across a very long series of statements could lead
> to severe roundoff error in the reported values, unless we use
> a method chosen for numerical stability.


The next question along those lines is whether we need to keep a running
mean or whether that can safely be calculated on the fly. The code at
<> does keep a running
mean, and maybe that's required to prevent ill conditioned results,
although I'm quite sure I see how it would. But this isn't my area of



In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2014-12-21 21:00:05 Re: Final Patch for GROUPING SETS
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2014-12-21 19:31:32 Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg